[Imports] [osm-pl] Fwd: Re: Import of addresses in Poland
adamw at happyassassin.net
Wed Feb 5 21:10:17 UTC 2014
On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 20:55 +0000, Dan S wrote:
> 2014-02-05 Ian Dees <ian.dees at gmail.com>:
> > On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Serge Wroclawski <emacsen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Alex Barth <alex at mapbox.com> wrote
> >>> And all of these imports while the contributor base continues to grow.
> >> Do you have data to show the rate of contributors against an area with
> >> imports vs without?
> > I think the point Alex was trying to make was that the overall OSM
> > contributor base is growing even though we have tons of imports already (and
> > they aren't even that great). For data on that, look at
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Stats.
> > But your statement does remind me of a good point: those that claim imports
> > harm community have not shown any data supporting that viewpoint.
> Here's some data for the conversation :)
> The whole talk is relevant, but Slide 25 onwards is most data-like.
> It's not an open and shut case but it seems to me that those who claim
> imports harm community have been studying the question...
That's interesting, but it seems like comparing one small area to
another small area may be insufficient in the context of...the entire
It also discusses a different type of imported data - land use. As a new
mapper myself, it's certainly more difficult/intimidating to deal with
shapes and ways than it is with points. (I'd also guess that an import
of this kind of data is more subject to error, but that really is a
guess). An address import, done correctly - as I understand it! - will
either just merge an additional bit of data into an existing shape
(which doesn't seem to change its 'level of intimidatingness' to a new
user much), or add a simple node with a bit of simply-understandable
data - a street address. I found it much easier to grok something like
this in my First Hour With OSM than it was to grok shapes and complex
things like different types of paths and land use.
To give a single anecdotal personal perspective - I'd be much more
likely to contribute to / continue contributing to OSM if a reasonably
comprehensive set of address data was in some way available for my
location, because probably 80% of my use of maps is 'where is this place
and how do I get there?', and street addresses are obviously highly
useful for that. If I can do that in OSM, then I'm more likely to *use*
OSM, and hence more likely to want to add further data to it - like,
once I find my way to a place, maybe I'll add the building shape and the
business hours and so forth.
If I can't do my main practical use of maps in OSM, then I won't be
getting anything immediately concrete out of contributing to it -
because I'll have to use something else for most of my actual practical
mapping needs - so it becomes somewhat less likely that I'll contribute.
But of course, that's a single insignificant data point. From what I've
seen in OSM-land so far it certainly seems like a lot of people use maps
in much different ways, where address data is insignificant /
More information about the Imports