[Imports] Hungarian CLC import

[Sylvain Maillard]

Hi,

in fact CLC data is not so accurate, as the patch size should be at a
minimum of 25ha and the segment minimum length of 100m ! it's not bad when
looking the data at a small scale, but when using a high zoom level it's
not so good ...

May I suggest to use the word "CLC" or "Corinne" in your source tag ?
"Készítette
a FÖMI a KvVM megbízásából ", even with the use of an automatic translator,
it is really not obvious that it's related to CLC import !
Don't hesitate also to make a wiki page about Hungary CLC import, and to
add oit on the lit (
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Corine_Land_Cover)


Cheers,
Sylvain



2012/10/29 Balázs Szalkai <bszalkai0 at gmail.com>

> More than about one third of Hungary has already been imported from the
> CLC dataset by others. The following tag is used for attribution:
>
> source=© EEA, Koppenhága (2009); Készítette a FÖMI a KvVM megbízásából
> (2009)
>
> I'm not a lawyer but I think this tagging is correct. see
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2011-April/057501.html
>
> What I do about existing data is: I check all the existing landuse
> polygons by hand before import. I remove most of the landuse=residential
> polygons, as they are usually also present in the CLC dataset and the CLC
> versions are more accurate (checked with Bing). There are also some
> existing sporadic forests and meadows, but usually they are also
> represented in CLC so then I delete them and copy the extra information
> (e.g. name of forest) into the newly imported forest polygon. There were
> 2-3 cases when CLC and existing data disagreed about a forest, CLC marked
> it as farm. Then I left both the existing and new data in place and tagged
> the forests with "fixme=please check this, i don't see any forest here on
> Bing and CLC marks this as farm, too" or something.
>
> I don't think CLC is low resolution. Vineyards, meadows, forests, etc. are
> usually accurate. See for example
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=46.3314&lon=19.0919&zoom=13&layers=M You
> can see here that CLC is well-detailed. Nevertheless, there are some voids
> that need to be filled manually in the future, as you can also see on the
> linked map fragment.
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:26 AM, Paul Norman <penorman at mac.com> wrote:
>
>> What tagging are you proposing to use?****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> What do you intend to do about existing data?****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> I’ve heard that CLC is a fairly low resolution dataset and not well
>> suited to OSM which is higher resolution. Is this true in your area?****
>>
>> **
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imports mailing list
> Imports at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/attachments/20121029/10a4e1cf/attachment.html>