[Imports] [Talk-us] MA towns

Metcalf, Calvin (DOT) calvin.metcalf at state.ma.us
Thu Oct 20 16:26:52 UTC 2011

All right so http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37626989/admin.zip
It retags all ways that make up counties to be admin_level=6;8
It adds a way with admin_level=8 and boundary=administrative to any town boarder that currently doesn't have one
All ways are non overlapping and are split based on where they need to be so that the same way can be used for both towns on the boarder

To do once this is done
-Redo the ways that make up both the ma outside boarder and the ma counties boarders. So that they are they are shared and not overlapping. 
-check out the coastline and see if it makes sense to replace it with the massgis one (it is probably going to be more accurate, the new boarders are significantly better then the old ones)
-Start create relations for all the towns.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Metcalf, Calvin (DOT) [mailto:calvin.metcalf at state.ma.us] 
>Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 10:09 AM
>To: 'Richard Weait'
>Cc: imports at openstreetmap.org; talk-us at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [Imports] [Talk-us] MA towns
>So I did do that with stow as a test, I deleted the current 
>boarder added the new one, turned it into a relation, and 
>merged each of the overlapping county boarders into it. 
>What I intended to do was to import admin data only where 
>there was not already existing data, but didn't notice that a 
>few of the counties were only tagged as admin=6 in the 
>relation but not in the underlying ways.  
>So what I can do is go through and take those out and then 
>edit the ways that make up those relations to add the correct 
>tags to the way. 
>A thing to point out is that with the exception of the 
>counties (which are a bit of a mess as it looks like whoever 
>uploaded them used polygons, so there are double ways at each 
>border.) There is not much of the internal boundaries in ma 
>already, and I'm hoping these new one will make it 
>significantly easier for people to edit and add boundary 
>relations for their own towns. 
>Does that make sense ?
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Richard Weait [mailto:richard at weait.com] 
>>Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 9:50 AM
>>To: Metcalf, Calvin
>>Cc: talk-us at openstreetmap.org; imports at openstreetmap.org
>>Subject: Re: [Talk-us] [Imports] MA towns
>>On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:10 AM, Metcalf, Calvin (DOT)
>><calvin.metcalf at state.ma.us> wrote:
>>>  If nobody objects I'll start uploading the towns from the 
>>admin8 file and stow file
>>Dear Calvin,
>>I have an objection and a suggestion.  See below.
>>> I noticed that a couple of the counties are only relations 
>>(i.e. the ways aren't tagged admin_level=6) so no lines are 
>>going to go in there.
>>I'm not sure I understand what you say here.  Are you saying that some
>>admin areas are only tagged on the relations?  Are you also saying you
>>object to such tagging only on the relations?  Or are you saying that
>>you won't upload into areas that are tagged only on the relations?
>>> With this done all borders in Mass will be represented by a 
>>tagged way, if that looks good I can put in the new counties 
>>and state boarder files that don't include any overlaps.
>>I believe that this thread (perhaps the other threads on the same
>>topic) has established that MA borders are sub-optimal.  Those borders
>>are from various imported sources.  Those imported sources disagree
>>with each other as shown by crossings and parallel borders where they
>>should be a shared line.
>>My objection is this.  Importing state wide data from yet another
>>source without addressing the existing border weaknesses will make the
>>MA border condition worse, not better.
>>My suggestion is this.  Please consider _editing_, not _importing_,
>>these town boundaries in a way that greatly improves MA borders.  Work
>>in very small areas at one time and touch each way individually, by
>>hand.  Reconcile the new town borders with the existing county / state
>>borders and improve those as you go.  Use a single way where
>>inappropriate duplicates now exist, and add the way to each of the
>>appropriate border relations.
>>Starting with Stow, (is this the right Stow?)
>>you might decide that the existing town border is correct-enough, then
>>merge the Worcester / Middlesex border to the town line where they are
>>expected to overlap.  Refer to other sources, perhaps aerial imagery,
>>at the same time and you'll have the opportunity to fix other problems
>>in / around Stow as well.  Then do a couple of the adjacent towns as
>>well.  Adjacent towns should be easier because you'll have already
>>sorted out one of the shared borders.
>>Yes, this sounds like a lot of work.  Yes, this is slower than just
>>throwing the import data over the garden wall.  But.  Do this and show
>>us a before and after screenshot with the beautiful, improved MA
>>borders.  Do this and provide these lists with the details of your
>>workflow and any helpful tricks and troublesome traps.  Do this and
>>perhaps you'll have other MA mappers flocking to assist in the great
>>MA border cleanup.  You can make the MA borders and the cleanup
>>process an example for other areas sharing the same border
>>Best regards,
>Imports mailing list
>Imports at openstreetmap.org

More information about the Imports mailing list