[Talk-us] CDP tagging

Brad Neuhauser brad.neuhauser at gmail.com
Fri Jan 9 15:30:37 UTC 2015


+1 to not having statistical boundaries in OSM.

Even actual legal administrative boundaries change as there are
annexations, detachments, mergers, improved accuracy, etc., so what's in
OSM (or from the Census) should be used with that in mind too.

On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 8:48 AM, Harald Kliems <kliems at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri Jan 09 2015 at 9:41:21 AM Richard Welty <rwelty at averillpark.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> i think CDP boundaries are very clear cut, but they morph
>> frequently, have no legal standing, and don't necessarily
>> correspond to what local residents think.
>>
> ... and there is no way to verify them on the ground. Yes, this is true
> for the various boundary/admin data too, but at least in that case there
> are good reasons for having them inside the OSM DB. So +1 for not having
> census boundaries in OSM.
>
>  Harald.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20150109/b8cf62d7/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list