[Talk-us] TIGER fixup and mapping "more"

Martijn van Exel m at rtijn.org
Thu Jul 12 23:51:15 BST 2012


Hi,

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Paul Johnson <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Mike N <niceman at att.net> wrote:
>>
>> On 7/12/2012 11:26 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>>>
>>> I like that idea, especially given the high number of obviously not
>>> urban roads that would be better off tagged as track or unclassified
>>> getting counted as residential (a more urban classification).  I'd be
>>> willing to extend this idea to any way tagged tiger:reviewed=no still,
>>> regardless of version number.
>>
>>
>> This seems like pointing a sledge hammer at an anthill.  We would actually
>> consider changing 99% of the roads, some of which have been reviewed for
>> name, type, and alignment but not for distance (I have done many of these),
>> just to address a 1% problem?
>
>
> I would hazard to guess that this is closer to being a 85% problem, given
> the sheer scale of the country and how few roads are actually urban in
> nature or paved at all.
>

As per June 13, about 44% of the ways in the US have tiger:cfcc=A41
(or 79% of ways that have the tiger:cfcc tag):

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkZlPbUaMXdGdFE3TEhkOWw0RkRSOUg1VndxWjlfSEE

-- 
martijn van exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com



More information about the Talk-us mailing list