[Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot

[Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)]

Nice work Matt

Cheers
Andy

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Matt Amos [mailto:zerebubuth at gmail.com]
>Sent: 10 June 2011 4:20 PM
>To: SteveC
>Cc: talk-gb at openstreetmap.org; Richard Fairhurst
>Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Analysis New Data and bot
>
>On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 12:36 PM, SteveC <steve at asklater.com> wrote:
>> There are tons of things. People drive in the US so pubs are difficult to
>arrange things around. Mapping in the US is boring because of the big
gridded
>cities. I map much less in the US than the UK. It's not just that there are
roads
>there already, which by the way is a good thing because I have sat for
hours
>correcting them against aerial.
>>
>> It's just not that simple to say imports killed it.
>
>some interesting facts:
>
>http://matt.dev.openstreetmap.org/editors_urban_per_month.png
>http://matt.dev.openstreetmap.org/editor_growth_comparison.png
>
>when the AND import ran (around sep '07), it seems the NL community was
>already about an order of magnitude larger than the US community when the
>TIGER import ran (roughly sep '07 - feb '08). in the comparison, with fewer
>countries but the time base adjusted so that they all hit 1 user per month
per
>million urban population at the same time, it's pretty clear to see that
the UK,
>NL and RU communities seem to be carving roughly the same path. the
>germans grew much faster over their first 3 years than other communities.
>
>the US is difficult to interpret. one view is that it grew at approximately
the
>same rate as UK, NL and RU until about 1.5 years in, where it plateaus.
that's
>late 2009, when there was lots of TIGER fixup activity and some big mapping
>parties (e.g: Atlanta). the alternative view is that the growth rate is
actually
>smaller, but that there's a temporary peak mid-late 2009 which masks that.
>
>given that these numbers are normalised to the *urban* population,
>population density issues don't come into it - we're basically looking at
cities.
>and given that AT and RU have a much lower proportion of their populations
>in urban areas than the US. Canada has about the same urbanisation as the
>US, and similar gridded cities, and similar attitudes to driving [1], but a
growth
>curve the same as France or Spain.
>
>this doesn't tell us what the cause of slow community growth in the US is,
but
>it does tell us that it isn't population density, it isn't driving
attitudes and it isn't
>the interestingness (or not) of the road layout.
>
>cheers,
>
>matt
>
>[1] 77% of Canadians use public transport "a few times a year" or less,
>compared with 88% of those in the US, 48% in the UK and 13% in Russia,
>according to
>http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/kbenfield/natgeo_surveys_countries_tran
>s.html
>
>_______________________________________________
>Talk-GB mailing list
>Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb