[Talk-us] California landuse import

Paul Norman penorman at mac.com
Thu Sep 22 08:59:03 BST 2011


I heard back from the user - this import is described at
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2010-October/000673.html

I'm following up on using smarter-sort.py for subsequent work, as well as
using a separate userid

Off to bed

- Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Toby Murray [mailto:toby.murray at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2011 9:52 PM
> To: talk-us
> Subject: Re: [Talk-us] California landuse import
> 
> Well I got a few comments on IRC about this but no one seems to have a
> real problems with it. I just noticed more of them going in tonight:
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/9357716
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/9361394
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/9365434
> 
> These changesets are all nodes. I assume the ways are coming in a
> subsequent changeset. This is pretty risky so I will keep an eye on this
> tomorrow.
> 
> Toby
> 
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Toby Murray <toby.murray at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Frederik's message on the imports mailing list reminded me... I was
> > going to ask if anyone knows about the import performed in these two
> > changesets in California:
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/9090477
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/9091078
> >
> > The result is clearly visible on the map here:
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=39.282&lon=-121.381&zoom=10&layers=M
> >
> > It looks like there may have been a similar one to the southeast of
> > there as well.
> >
> > Here is an example of an imported object:
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1722536
> >
> > The import itself looks like it was executed fairly well from a
> > technical standpoint although I would take issue with the lack of
> > information in the changeset comment and no source tag (although it
> > looks like the relations have a source tag on them at least)
> >
> > But I don't remember seeing any talk about this import before it
> > happened. Is this useful data to OSM? The example relation I linked to
> > is a natural=wood area which is certainly a mappable thing although it
> > does seem to abruptly stop at the county border which I doubt is the
> > real boundary of the forest... thoughts?
> >
> > Toby
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us




More information about the Talk-us mailing list