[Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot

[Ed Avis]

Jason Cunningham <jamicuosm at ...> writes:

>I'd also like to give my support to using a bot to add names to existing roads.

>1 -  It would reduce "foot surveys" which would mean missing out on POI's
>(etc).  Now feel this argument is short sighted and we would still have to
>deal with how we map POI when all streets are surveyed, so that should not
>stop us using the OS data.

I would like to note that for me, using the OS data has been a great way to
increase foot surveys.  There are many areas which looked complete on the map,
until OS showed that lots of roads (or public buildings) were missing.  Adding
those roads has spurred me to visit the areas on foot to mop up unnamed streets
and to hunt down places of worship among other things.

Different sources are complementary to each other and should not be viewed
as alternatives.  Even with 'classic OSM' we had Yahoo tracing combined with
foot surveys.

>So this weekend I could go out and get names for remaining streets in my area,
>or we could use the "bot"...

Please remember that you can do both - you can still visit to map by hand
before or after adding information from OS or any other source.  You might
instead decide to concentrate your mapping time on those things that we can't
get from OS as a first priority.  But at least you are able to make an informed
choice.

However, to make sure that people have all the information when deciding what
to go out and map, and to accommodate those who have quite reasonable concerns
about ending up duplicating mistakes in the OS data, we need tools which show
which parts of the map come from OS.  ITO's map layer
<http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/ito_map/main?view=117> is an example.

-- 
Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com>