[Imports] USNPS, Great Smoky Mountains Bulk Import In Progress

Paul Norman penorman at mac.com
Thu Jun 13 22:02:27 UTC 2013


I'm cc'ing imports@ as you're obliged to consult with them *before* imports.

It took me longer than I had hoped to get to this, but hopefully this will 
be of value not just for fixing up what you've imported, but if you plan to 
propose an import in the future.

> From: Thomas Colson [mailto:thomas_colson at nps.gov]
> Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 8:23 AM
> Subject: [Imports-us] USNPS, Great Smoky Mountains Bulk Import In
> Progress
> 
> The parking icons and labels are a bit obtrusive in the default OSM
> renderer, as are the building labels. I'll likely remove some parking
> node tags as well as building labels, really not necessary to label
> every shed and generator building (this is what came out of our default
> facilities data). Parking ways are also named, so I don't see a problem
> with not labeling every single parking node.

Generally you shouldn't have the same object as both a tagged way and a
tagged node. It's better to use ways if you have that data. Unfortunately,
it can be hard to decide what parking to include and what to not include
because we don't have a great way for mapping street-side parking where such
parking is the exception.

For the specific issue of parking, the current osm.org stylesheet
over-emphasizes parking and I've added a ticket at
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/70.

> Nate and Mamata will be presenting our work at State of the Map in a few
> weeks, and will incorporate feedback into the remainder of the park
> import.

Needless to say, any new import needs to be discussed with the local 
community and the imports@ mailing list before it is done.

On to the data itself, I have a few comments.

- There are nps:verified tags all over the place, including as the only tag
on some nodes. These should probably be bulk-deleted with a mechanical edit.
tiger:reviewed showed pretty clearly that these sorts of tags don't work and
the current consensus is against using them.

- There are lots of duplicate ways. Elkmont Amphitheater is a good example,
with 3 duplicates on each building.

- There is duplication between some ways and nodes, for example node
2316591213 and way 222715028 are both the same amenity=toilets

- The ways like http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/223083427 seem
unlikely to me. The one near
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=35.6719&mlon=-83.5805&zoom=18 doesn't
match the imagery

- Are all of the building=yes historic=ruins still standing as buildings?
Also, they have a lot of duplicate ways.

- Some of the ways are mildly (~2x, not ~10x) over-noded like
http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/19608607

I should also mention that the overall state of the borders (national park
or administrative) was poor and I've done some cleanup. Also issues 64, 65
and 69 in openstreetmap-carto are all about rendering of national parks,
which has some inconsistencies. 




More information about the Imports mailing list