[Talk-us] [Imports] Kansas City addresses from maps.kcmo.org

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Sat Jul 30 12:26:09 UTC 2016


On 07/29/2016 11:46 PM, Jonathan Schleuss wrote:
> I'm kind of curious about this. Why not import those property lines? I'm
> not arguing for them, because it seems like a lot of work. But I note
> that in cities such as Fresno, they are in the map
> <https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/36.74878/-119.71442> as
> landuse=residential.

Yes, sadly some imports have been done in the past without consultation
and it will take some time to get rid of them.

>  What if we add all the buildings, all the trees,
> every bench? Why not add property boundaries? I'm thinking 2030 here.

If there's a fence on the boundary, you can map the fence. Or any other
physical marker, if you so desire. Mapping in-visible boundaries is a
bad idea because it runs against our desire to have things verifiable on
the ground - this is one reason that keeps us safe from a whole class of
edit wars where people disagree about something that cannot be proven.

We make an exception from that rule for admin boundaries because their
usefulness is so high that it overrules the problem (usually) not being
visible on the ground.

OpenStreetMap is, mostly, a project driven by people who contribute data
that they survey. Data imports can occasionally help but they're not the
mainstay of OSM.

A data set of parcel boundaries can easily be displayed on top of OSM,
or integrated into your rendering stack if you need these boundaries,
but it doesn't make much sense in OSM because it will usually not be
curated by individual mappers. It would just sit there, being replaced
by a new import once a year (or not) - OSM would be abused as a data
transport for third party data.


Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

More information about the Talk-us mailing list