[Talk-us] Admin boundaries tied to roads

[Apollinaris Schoell]

On 19 Apr 2010, at 20:07 , Alan Mintz wrote:

> At 2010-04-19 10:45, Mike N. wrote:
>>  I see that the separate VS tangled argument has been settled in the US by
>> the "Duplicate Node attack bots", who have blindly merged all duplicate
>> nodes.
>> 
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/38855677
> 
> Is this really happening? Can someone describe exactly what criteria are 
> being used, and just how it was decided that this was a good idea? Seems 
> like the wrong thing to do - city and county boundaries are often defined 
> in law, or by survey, and do not necessarily keep up with changes in road 
> alignment. I have resisted editing most of these boundaries until/unless I 
> take the time to research the true definition of the boundary.
> 
> Not to mention that merging them will result in the inability to hide these 
> boundaries. When doing a bunch of editing on a road that follows one, in 
> the past, I've taken the time to verify that the boundary doesn't share any 
> nodes with anything and then remove it from my local OSM file manually so I 
> don't have to constantly deal with it. If it shares nodes with anything 
> else, this is no longer possible.

fully agree, the good thing is these boundaries are tiger data and bad data anyway and should be replaced with better boundaries
> 
> Sounds a lot like the IMO ill-considered road name expansion that was 
> apparently agreed upon by a small group of people without input from the 
> majority of active mappers whose work has been damaged.

agreed, no idea why this was done. it's a change without much benefit but lot's of damage. 

> 
> --
> Alan Mintz <Alan_Mintz+OSM at Earthlink.net>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us