[Talk-us] tiff, dwg and nad83

[Dale Puch]

Regarding Frederik's 4 points, plus the element duplication issue as
reasons imports are bad:

ALL are potentially true for any mapper especially new ones.  It is just
that a bad import can generate a lot more good/bad data at once.  So yes,
imports need more effort to insure good quality.
Regarding dupe items, this is both import related and upload related.  The
import side is obvious, but failed uploads of any source have generated
lots of duplicates as well.  This is admittedly more prone with imported
data, I would guess fewer users doing manual edits tried to make large
uploads.
See the notes below for the rest.

On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Serge Wroclawski <emacsen at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>
> wrote:
>
>
> I think this point is controversial, so let's stick with some points
> that aren't:
>
> 1. In our history of imports, a very small percentage have been good.
>
Compare a users early imports to their early mapping


> 2. We have no current technology to keep an import synced with another
> data source, so the data goes stale quickly.
>
Also true for manual edits.  Why is this considered just an import issue?


> 3. Many imports are of datasets we don't want in OSM and we have
> little/no mechanism outside community vetting to discover that until
> it's too late.
>
Any user can decide that they want to include "X" into the dataset imported
or manually mapped.

4. Most imports are bad, and most imports are left in OSM, which means
> we have tons of garbage in OSM. Garbage in OSM makes the map harder to
> work with for mappers, for tool-makers and for users.
>
see all above

>
> - Serge
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>



-- 
Dale Puch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20120417/bcdbf995/attachment.html>