[Talk-us] TIGER 2010 Imports
osm at inbox.org
Wed Dec 15 18:00:42 GMT 2010
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Ian Dees <ian.dees at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Ian Dees <ian.dees at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > First of all, can we agree as a group to hold off on importing or
>> > applying
>> > any TIGER 2010 data until we come up with a way to apply changes in a
>> > uniform and somewhat organized manner?
>> I don't see why TIGER 2010 should be treated differently from any
>> other imports. If you have data that you're sure is more accurate
>> than what's already there, and are using well-established tags, then
>> go ahead and import. If you're not sure if your data is more accurate
>> than what's already there, don't import. If you are making up your
>> own tags, then talk about it first.
> I can't think of any US, national-level imports (other than the original
> TIGER import, perhaps) that have gone well.
That seems to me like a good argument *against* importing TIGER in a
uniform and somewhat organized manner.
> In the areas I've spot-checked, TIGER 2010 has better resolution and more
> road data than untouched TIGER-imported OSM data.
How much of that is there, anyway?
More information about the Talk-us