[Talk-us] More on TIGER: Where it's likely safe to import

[Michal Migurski]

On Dec 17, 2012, at 1:58 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 12/17/12 04:02, Michal Migurski wrote:
>> I pulled together some of the notes and imagery I've been posting here recently:
>> 
>> 	http://www.openstreetmap.us/~migurski/green-means-go/
> 
> I take offense at your wording (on the page): "Where in the United States could government imports improve OpenStreetMap?" - you might add data to OSM but will you improve OSM? It's not the same, and equating the two is a mistake that insiders should not make.
> 
> The wording
> 
>> Green squares show places where data imports are unlikely to interfere with community mapping.
> 
> is also misleading; it has been shown that imports can very well interfere with *future* community mapping of which you would, naturally, not find traces in the data you analysed.
> 
> The correct wording is:
> 
> "Green squares show places where little or no community mapping has taken place in the past."


How about something like this?
	"Green squares show places where data imports are unlikely to conflict with past community mapping."

I think in the case of the US, the previous government data is so bad relative to what's currently out there that a fresh import will necessarily improve OSM, if I can make the green areas more reflective of the true state of edited places. Full history is a means to this; I've got some off-list responses from people who don't think that their own mapping efforts are accurately reflected in the green squares.

-mike.

----------------------------------------------------------------
michal migurski- contact info and pgp key:
sf/ca            http://mike.teczno.com/contact.html