[Talk-us] tiger:review=yes

Jim Brown jim at cloudmade.com
Fri Nov 28 19:00:36 GMT 2008


>  > On a related topic...  We are assuming that some portion of tiger
data  
>  > may never be edited as it is correct..,  any feelings on how much
this  
>  >is, or how to detect it?  One approach we are considering is to see it

>  >a road has pois along it...  If so it is probably ok, I'd love other  
>  > ideas.

> Well, I think that was the point of the "tiger:reviewed=yes" tag.
> Perhaps the procedure should be to delete the tiger:reviewed tag when
you review a way?  Absence == yes.

Absence of tiger:reviewed means "==yes" makes perfect sense to be sure...


Interestingly, I think that the act of setting the reviewed=yes will
update the last edit date (and the userid), and so filtering on that first
will catch edited roads where the tag was left...  

I guess what I'm trying to get a handle on is, how much of the tiger data
do we think will never be edited at all, because it is good and correct
already (is it a vanishingly small percentage? Or significant... Probably
depends on the county or state and how good their source data was prior to
being combined)...  

One thing that could be interesting to put up is to do a map style with
un-edited tiger data shown in highlight (like our no-names map) and then
add the ability to let the viewer validate it, or specific portions of it,
as being correct.  

To do the style we could filter on tiger:reviewed, userid and date and
possibly show 

  Base Case of cannot be tiger is (Not Dave H and/or last_edit not between
Nov 2007 and Feb 2008) -> good
  reviewed=yes -> good...  
  Reviewed=not present -> good...  
  Reviewed=No -> suspect bad, needs to be reviewed

Probably needs the open auth features of api 0.6 to do it right, (or
running it on OSM itself).  Should be pretty easy to develop the style and
tiles however.



j

-----Original Message-----
From: talk-us-bounces at openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-us-bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Russ Nelson
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 6:42 PM
To: talk-us at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-us] tiger:review=yes

jim at cloudmade.com writes:
 > One thing that would help a lot is if massive batch imports (tiger,  >
mass gis etc) can each use a userid specific to the load.  Then  >
identifying un edited data it is simple as any edit changes the userid.

Absolutely.

 > On a related topic...  We are asuming that some portion of tiger data
> may never be edited as it is correct..,  any feelings on how much this
> is, or how to detect it?  One approach we sre consisering is to see it
> a road has pois along it...  If so it is probably ok, I'd love other  >
ideas.

Well, I think that was the point of the "tiger:reviewed=yes" tag.
Perhaps the procedure should be to delete the tiger:reviewed tag when you
review a way?  Absence == yes.

-- 
--my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com   | Delegislation is a
slippery
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | slope to prosperity.
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241       | Fewer laws, more
freedom.
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog          | (Not a GOP supporter).

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
 

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 3649 (20081128) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20081128/905b74d8/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list