[Talk-us] parcel data in OSM

[Ian Dees]

There sure is a huge amount of imported data in OSM, but I don't see what's
frustrating about distinguishing between useful and not-useful data
imports. What we've been discussing here is what sort of data should be
imported and if it's useful.

On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Jeff Meyer <jeff at gwhat.org> wrote:

> I am very sympathetic to what I sense to be Jason's (and Michael's and
> others') frustrations. It's quite clear there are a *very* large number of
> imports that have contributed to the body of data that is OSM (Incomplete
> list here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Import).
>
> Hopefully, this frustration hasn't gone to waste. : ) I think this thread
> has generated some thoughtful commentary (see: Ian's statements below & a
> great email off-thread that Serge sent me) that I hope will be integrated
> into DWG-sanctioned guidelines for imports. For those not on imports@,
> I've sent a separate note to the DWG asking for clarification on where to
> look for their guidelines.
>
> - Jeff
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Ian Dees <ian.dees at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Your original question was "what should the exact criteria be for
>> including an 'open space' parcel in OSM?" and I think your answer is
>> that there shouldn't be exact criteria. As frustrating as it is sometimes,
>> there aren't exact criteria for anything in OSM.
>>
>> Having said that: you should map things that are verifiable by another
>> mapper on the ground (parks, schools, hospitals, named open spaces) and you
>> should not import generic parcel data. You agreed with that in your second
>> sentence, but there were plenty of messages in this thread talking about it
>> :).
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20121230/59673b88/attachment.html>