[Talk-us] About TIGER ways in Kansas

Kate Chapman kate at maploser.com
Mon Oct 25 03:51:39 BST 2010


I think the county by county approach works as well.

Mike, are you specifically interested in Arkansas?  The state level
data might be better than TIGER and the state is very interested in
getting it into OSM.

-Kate

On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Mike N. <niceman at att.net> wrote:
>> post today about a class project I just finished in which I made a
>> thematic map concerning the TIGER ways in Kansas.
>
>  Great analysis - I did something similar for Arkansas, but it was statewide
> and not county by county.   I concur with your analysis - we need to retain
> interstate and US highway edits where global routability has been created.
>  Approaching it on a county by county basis is a good plan also; that will
> give us a chance to stitch up the county borders on all roads this time as
> counties are updated.    That will be a HUGE project - keep in mind that
> some *major* interstate routes have finally been converted to dual
> carriageway just last week.
>
>  As far as how to approach the TIGER 2010, some advanced conflation tools
> will be needed / welcome.   Something that can produce just a Geo-Diff set
> of data, or allow virtual tracing over the new information as required. I
> haven't seen the data, so I can't guess what can be done, but since I have
> extensively modified my area, I envision just doing adds / deletes, and if
> they have updated old stuff with actual county centerlines, I can replace
> just areas created from "back of napkin style" geometries that you have seen
> in your area.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>



More information about the Talk-us mailing list