[Talk-ca] Hiking trails - Is bad data better than no data?

[G. Michael Carter]

You have my vote.  Just having the inaccurate data will draw more people to the trail.  Higher percent chance of getting more gps data for the area.

Sent from my iPhone

On 2010-07-25, at 10:57 PM, Darryl Shpak <darryl at shpak.ca> wrote:

> Hey all,
> 
> A quick question here, since I'm somewhat out-of-touch with OSM best practices right now. Last week I hiked a couple of trails in a local provincial park, and collected traces with intent to map them. However, I know the data is of questionable quality...on the first trail, I walked one segment twice and there's a significant disparity between the two gps tracks, and on the second trail, my GPS was reporting 20-30m position error at times.
> 
> Neither of these trails existed in OSM at all (no GPS tracks, no ways). I've uploaded my GPS traces and I'm mapping my trails on the assumption that an inaccurate trace is better than no data at all, but wanted to check with the wider community to see what the general consensus was on this. Is there anything special I should tag the trace or way with to indicate that I know the tracks are a little flaky?
> 
> Sample trail:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=49.69252&lon=-95.33649&zoom=16&layers=M
> 
> - Darryl
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca