[Imports] Import Proposal - Los Angeles County Land Use

Serge Wroclawski emacsen at gmail.com
Wed Oct 2 12:04:41 UTC 2013


I think this is really great, really smart, innovative and awesome
work generally.

The direction you're going is exactly along the trajectory that we're
moving as a community, using the combination of people and tools and
trying to figure out how to use them both where they can do the best
job. As we do this, we're all going to have new ideas and tools, and
as people try things out, we'll see where it goes.

So kudos for taking this on, and kudos for developing a new workflow,
with a new tool to help.

All that said, I have a few questions, and a couple of concerns.

My main concern is one you've already addressed, which is scope. Since
your workflow is so new, would it be possible to start with only a
single feature, show that it works, and then move on to another?

My second concern is updating the data. While many of the features you
list don't change annually, they do change over time, and so some
thought on the future would be really good. This is where some
conflation tools can come into play.  How about just considering the
work it would take to do an update of the data, possibly even using
the same tools and community effort?

And now a question...

Your tool does a great job at helping users compare the geometry of
two features. How does it do about tag preservation? For example, if
the mapped feature has less good geometry, but better tags, will that
be shown somewhere?


- Serge

More information about the Imports mailing list