[Talk-us] Discardable TIGER tags
aschoell at gmail.com
Mon Jul 30 22:20:29 BST 2012
great idea, have done it manually from time to time when I edit tiger data.
just adding my support after reading pro/con for certain tags. Ideally you
can come up with a default list and users can extend it.
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Toby Murray <toby.murray at gmail.com> wrote:
> Some people may not even be aware of this but JOSM silently discards
> the created_by tag if it exists on any object you change and upload to
> the API. This tag was deemed unnecessary and counterproductive a long
> time ago and this is just a way of cleaning it out of the database as
> people edit. Not sure if Potlatch does anything like this.
> What do you think about adding a couple of TIGER tags to be silently
> dropped? As more attributes get added to things in OSM the tag list
> can get kind of big and annoying to look through, especially when some
> of them are of no real value. Specifically, I try to always do a
> "modified" search in JOSM before I upload and remove the
> tiger:separated and tiger:upload_uuid tags from things I have touched.
> I believe the tiger:separated tag was set on all residential or higher
> roads. 98.6% of the values are "no" and most of them are on minor
> streets where it is not really an interesting value. On the remaining
> roads it seems, in my experience, to be wrong a majority of the time
> anyway. So I see no value in this tag.
> I believe Dave Hansen said the UUID tag was useful during the TIGER
> import process to verify things and fix problems but I see no value in
> it now. It is such a large value that it takes up about 1 GB of space
> in the (uncompressed XML) planet file according to my calculations.
> As stated above, this would only delete the tags on objects that you
> have already modified in some way, not on everything you download.
> Are there any other tags that people feel should be automatically
> discarded? tiger:tlid and tiger:county seem mildly useful. What about
> tiger:cfcc and tiger:source? I don't currently remove those from my
> changesets but don't really see too much use for them either. Not
> really sure about the zip code tags. They seem like they could be
> useful but I am not aware of anything that actually uses them. If
> there is agreement, I will submit a patch to the JOSM devs and
> reference this thread.
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-us