[Talk-us] deleting misleading CDPs

Paul Norman penorman at mac.com
Fri May 31 19:16:36 UTC 2013

> From: Richard Welty [mailto:rwelty at averillpark.net]
> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:22 PM
> To: Talk Openstreetmap
> Subject: [Talk-us] deleting misleading CDPs
> my feeling is that if there's a named town then including a much smaller
> CDP with the same name is quite misleading. i think the same situation
> exists in Rotterdam NY and if i find that that's the case, i'll apply
> the same remedy.

I agree with this. I'd only favor including CDPs if there was no city there
but people expected administrative delineation. Someone local would be the
best judge of if the CDP was relevant.

I do not agree with including CDPs for their own sake. If someone wants the
CDPs, they should go to the census and layer the results in their rendering
or whatever they're doing. Unlike city boundaries, CDPs aren't useful to a
wide range of people and they are readily available in a geodata format.
Also, a CDP is what the census thinks a place is, so by definition what they
say a CDP is they are correct. This differs from admin boundaries where
there is no one authoritative  source and there is frequent disagreement on
what they are in some regions.

More information about the Talk-us mailing list