[Talk-us] Discardable TIGER tags

[Alan Mintz]

At 2012-07-28 00:33, Toby Murray wrote:
>What do you think about adding a couple of TIGER tags to be silently
>dropped? ...
>tiger:separated
>tiger:upload_uuid

+1


>tiger:separated

I never knew what it was supposed to mean. If it was (as its name suggests) 
to indicate a physical separation between roadways in each direction, it's 
almost never accurate for that purpose, IME. Even if it once was, that's 
probably the most commonly changed feature of a road, usually by building 
of raised planted center dividers.[0]


>UUID

+1


>tiger:tlid

At one point, I tried to use TLID for something, only to discover that 
there was a bug in the import that ended up putting the wrong values on 
some ways. This was confirmed by Dave Hansen at the time I brought it up. 
Dump it. This brings up another issue[1].


>tiger:county

I'm not sure this has been maintained well. I've seen roads combined to 
cross county lines. People have worked hard on better county polygons, 
which we should use. Dump it.


>tiger:cfcc
>tiger:source

+1


>zip code

Often inaccurate, and subject to the same lack of maintenance problem. I 
found it useful for a while to get me in the right area when consulting a 
zip-to-assessor's book lookup I created for San Bernardino County, but I 
have a better solution now. Dump it.


Some people have been removing some TIGER tags already for a while. My only 
concern would be that, if all the TIGER tags are removed from an object, we 
should add TIGER05 to the source tag, so as not to completely lose attribution.


[0] When micro-mapping planted raised medians and grass strips along 
sidewalks, what are the correct tags to use? They're not gardens, forests, 
or parks, though they have grass and trees.

[1] When combining ways in JOSM (at least), values for tiger:* tags are 
combined with ":" (colon) as a delimiter, instead of ";" (semi-colon). Why, 
and should this be changed?

--
Alan Mintz <Alan_Mintz+OSM at Earthlink.net>