[talk-au] Wild guess surveying

[Darrin Smith]

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 10:35:01 +0900
"Andrew Laughton" <laughton.andrew at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, very easy to fix, and I have fixed other roads that were also
> wrong, the worry is, how many others need fixing and where are they.
> Maybe a polite message could solve the problem, or maybe a rough
> position is better than no position, and there is no problem.

I think there's actually 2 issues you've hit on in this. One you
outline here and the other is the issue of what the original author
used as a source for the estimation.

On the issue you have listed here I'd suggest at some level it would
be a good thing to have rough estimations drawn in, at least for major
features (which landsat can provide if nothing else), an empty block of
map just doesn't help anyone at all really. Data can always get more
accurate as time goes by as someone with more specific information
refines the paths, much like you are doing in this case. When new data
obviously over-rides older data in the map people should not have
hesitation correcting things.

The other issue is a potentially nastier one, especially given that
landsat supports something approximating the traces you made in this
case, I worry that your suspicions may be correct, or perhaps that the
person who drew it in based it upon personal experience from a long
time ago (dodgy source at best ;). I think a polite message suggesting
that you are concerned about the source of his data might not go astray
in this case.

-- 
Darrin Smith
sdar at salseast.org