[Imports-us] [Imports] Durham and Chatham County Address Imports (North Carolina, USA)
James Umbanhowar
jumbanho at gmail.com
Sat Jul 21 20:43:08 UTC 2018
Point taken. In this case, they are the center of property polygons,
so not on buildings, conflated with buildings nor at entrances. I
don't mind if they are reasonably placed as nodes, but these are not
quite there, yet.
James
On Sat, 2018-07-21 at 15:34 -0400, Nathan Mills wrote:
> To the extent that the address points are not duplicates of existing
> address nodes, unconflated address nodes are a perfectly legitimate
> means of mapping and do not need to be "fixed." Even if the address
> exists on a poly, it's still fine as long as the node is marking
> something meaningful, like the front door of the building. Some have
> in the past gone so far to say that nodes are preferable since it
> allows routers for the differently abled to provide door-to-door
> guidance.
>
> -Nathan
>
>
> On July 21, 2018 2:39:36 PM EDT, James Umbanhowar <jumbanho at gmail.com
> > wrote:
> > Sorry, I just saw this. Please do not upload this, yet. You have
> > not
> > responded to any of the feedback that I have given. Instead you
> > have
> > chosen to just upload all the points into the database and then
> > correct
> > the database afterwards.
> >
> > Please, instead, break this into smaller areas and then conflate
> > the
> > points with existing objects and then upload. From what I can tell,
> > this would be easiest done with the Tasking Manager.
> >
> > Also, I have already signalled my willingness to help with this
> > task
> > and using the tasking manager would allow me and possibly others to
> > help.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > James
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 23:42 -0400, Leif Rasmussen wrote:
> > > Hi everyone!
> > I have finally verified the license on the Chatham
> > > County, NC address data which includes about 44,000 address
> > > points.
> > > It is public domain except for that it has a "no direct resale"
> > > policy that allows indirect resale (includes other data), which
> > > is
> > > compatible with OSM. Durham County, which uses the ODbL has
> > > also
> > > produced address data. I will be completing both the imports
> > > this
> > > weekend. Some discussion has taken place about adding buildings
> > > in
> > > Durham at the same time as the import, but to keep everything
> > > more
> > > simple, I have decided on just adding nodes for now and then
> > > merging
> > > with buildings later. This would reduce complexity and help
> > > everything run more smoothly. I will upload all of the data
> > > alone.
> > > This helps keep everything more simple, leading to fewer
> > > mistakes. I
> > > do not see very much benefit to having several account all
> > > importing
> > > the data.
> >
> > Details:
> > Size of both imports combined: 190,000 addresses
> > Date of upload: Saterday and Sunday, 21st and 22nd of July, 2018
> > Type of import: One time with JOSM in 20 changesets.
> > Account: LeifRasmussen_import
> >
> > Wiki pages:
> > Durham County
> > Chatham County
> >
> > Please let me know of any concerns of ideas! I would love to
> > improve
> > the import as much as I can.
> > Thanks!
> > Leif Rasmussen
> >
> >
> > Imports mailing list
> > Imports at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
>
More information about the Imports-us
mailing list