[Imports] Florida Landuse Import

[Brian May]

So you started importing florida land cover / use again. Where's the 
announcement? The way I found out was browsing around rural areas of 
Florida to see what the latest activity was and found a big surprise. 
You imported a very large chunk of real estate, just like last time. 
What step in the Import Guidelines doc[1] are you at? Last I checked you 
hadn't passed step 2.5 "You must not import the data without local buy-in."

You saw the discussions going on in Slack, right? In the imports and 
local-florida channels. That is where you had all your previous 
discussions before posting on the mailing list your intention to start 
an import way back in late Feb. Did you stop looking? There are several 
pending issues that aren't resolved. But you went ahead and restarted 
the import anyway.

So at this point, I continue to see total lack of regard for the import 
process and input from the local community. Let me know if I missed 
something here.

To be clear, I'm personally not against some importing of land cover / 
land use data in FL. The point is we must all follow agreed upon 
processes. Imports are notoriously have lots of issues, especially land 
cover / land use related ones!

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines

Brian aka grouper

On 3/31/2022 1:42 PM, Hiausirg wrote:
> "you'll find many things conflated with coastline ways"
> True - but of course, i didn't suggest to do this blindly everywhere. People should judge for themselfes if they want to replace coastlines or use the existing ones. Most coastlines merged with other features are in urban areas - which aren't touched anyway.
>
> "It wouldn't astonish me to find a great many sections of coastline where the mapping has been improved since the original import."
> Also true - if they are detailed enough (many from grouper are, for example), they should be kept, or at least their history by using JOSMs "Replace Geometry" feature. But still, many coastlines are completely untouched and need a lot of cleanup.
>
> A few words on the tasking manager approach: I don't think it makes sense to create 60 individual projects for 60 counties. Maybe for the first 1 or 2 counties, but not for everything. Creating 5 projects by using the borders of the 5 water management districts is way easier, and the data quality won't suffer either.
>
> "I don't think that it is a bad thing for an import to take a long time. If time is needed to do it well, then things will take longer."
> True! But how well is well enough? I recently deleted large parts of a 13-year old landuse import in Georgia, because everything was so incredibly horrible quality. (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119065140). No one bothered to do this, in 13 years. It wasn't even hard. Or other example from FL: Someone adds landuse=forest to a large protected area boundary, and certainly not everything was "landuse=forest". It stays for over a year, until i removed it recently (relation 3499712). No one else cared. And everything here is supposed to be absolutely great now, the last JOSM validator error where two landuses overlap a half inch or whatever has to be fixed? I don't get that.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Imports mailing list
> Imports at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
>