[Imports] Handling of existing buildings in NYC import (was Re: Buildings & Address in Washington, DC, USA.)

[Katie Filbert]

On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 3:02 AM, Alex Barth <alex at mapbox.com> wrote:

> Katie -
>
> Can you show me an example?
>
>
Some of the problematic things I found earlier this week when surveying:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/179039

http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/178197

It's difficult to go back and look at the deleted buildings and say which
were better, but I don't think any were kept as far as i can tell.  We even
put in addresses! and they were deleted. I don't think that was necessary.

Also, think generally having paid mappers is not a good thing, and the
import should have been done by the local community even if it takes
longer, imho.

Katie



> We took great care to:
>
> - Preserve existing buildings where they had higher quality than import
> buildings
> - Merge POIs were appropriate
> - Don't touch POIs at all when situation unclear
>
> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Katie Filbert <filbertk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> It looks like for NYC imports, they simply deleted existing buildings and
>> added the new ones.  This includes areas that I surveyed on the ground,
>> ensuring POIs lined up with the buildings correctly, updating for
>> demolished / new buildings etc.
>>
>> To be honest, that is quite discouraging and demotivating to continue
>> contributing to OSM.  The same thing ought not happen for DC, if we
>> don't want to alienate the community.
>>
>
>
>


-- 
Katie Filbert
filbertk at gmail.com
@filbertkm / @wikimediadc / @wikidata
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/attachments/20140606/f5f5676f/attachment-0001.html>