[Talk-us] On the subject of TIGER

[Dave Hansen]

On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 13:36 -0400, Theodore Book wrote:
> Since we are speaking of TIGER, the quality of the data seems to vary 
> according to county - some are consistently good, others consistently 
> poor.  Has anyone looked at the TIGER 2008 data to see if it is better? 
>   We have some counties in Georgia that have poor TIGER data in OSM, and 
> very few edits, so that the TIGER data could simply be replaced if a 
> better source were available.

I've looked at it, and it is better.  Someone even posted some overlays
of old versus new data to this list a while back.

Someone just needs to go write the conversion scripts as a first
step. :)

-- Dave