[OSM-newbies] Opinions on my Work

[Karl Latham]

That area is another community centre, I thought I'd tagged it but  
maybe not.

Accuracy wise, the google map is outdated in my area, the school has  
had old wasteground cleared to make up more grass area for them.

Mapping has been done for the buildings, purely from waypoints, and  
images taken on the ground, for most areas near buildings the GPS  
tracks go crazy.

Also I didn't do any of the roads in the area apart from 2 dead ends,  
but I know that alot need redoing to be accurate, a job for the summer  
I think.

Sent from my iPod

On 24 Nov 2009, at 01:25, James Ewen <ve6srv at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Karl <karl at digitalattic.net> wrote:
>
>> Could someone take a look at it all, specifically the church and  
>> give me
>> some comments.
>
> Looking better from afar! It's difficult to know how well you are
> doing at mapping what is on the ground as we aren't familiar with the
> area. However, comparing satellite images from Google, against what
> you have mapped, it looks like you are mapping things in their
> approximate locations.
>
> Yes, I know we can't use Google Images for mapping, but I'm only using
> it for comparison. The Yahoo images are very low quality in the area.
>
> I note things like the church parking lot area is much larger than the
> actual parking lot. The Church outline is a rough approximation of the
> area the Church encompasses. The area of the Church grounds, and the
> bowling green appear to be larger than the actual area.
>
> Over at the school, the building area outline is smaller than the
> actual school, and is rotated slightly from reality. The shape of the
> grounds is quite a bit different from what is seen on the ground.
> Google also lists the name of the way as Wat's, in the possessive,
> rather than Wats in the plural. (Again, you can't copy information
> from Google, I'm just using it for comparison since I have no access
> to the area personally.) One would have to check the street signs in
> the area to find the real name of the way.
>
> If you are mapping this area just by walking around, and noting the
> general layout, you're doing pretty good. If you are walking the
> outline of the areas and buildings with a GPS, you need to see if you
> can get better data. I turned on the public GPS traces in the area,
> but don't see any that might trace out the outline of the area
> elements, nor buildings.
>
> You're in a difficult area, as having high resolution aerial images
> makes this type of work pretty easy. Doing it without the images can
> be difficult. Looking at roads in the area shows a lot of
> approximation, as there are bends in straight roads, and straight
> sections in roads that bend.
>
> You are doing better in my opinion with this latest incarnation than
> the first attempt.
>
> BTW, what this area? http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/44909585
> there are no tags on it.
>
> James
> VE6SRV
>
> _______________________________________________
> newbies mailing list
> newbies at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies