[Talk-us] Is this a bad import or an experiment?

Eric Ladner eric.ladner at gmail.com
Wed Mar 22 14:56:00 UTC 2017


I can clean it up (manually), if everybody agrees.
  * remove small polygonal driveways
  * convert larger polygonal highways to actual highways where appropriate

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 9:27 AM Tod Fitch <tod at fitchdesign.com> wrote:

>
> On Mar 22, 2017, at 4:59 AM, Ian Dees <ian.dees at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mar 22, 2017 7:49 AM, "Paul Johnson" <baloo at ursamundi.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 6:33 AM, Eric Ladner <eric.ladner at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/33.74152/-116.29677
>
> So much wrongness..  I don't even know where to start in describing it.
>
>
>  This really "feels" like a botched import that has the potential to
> become something actually good.  I've reached out.
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/38292137
>
>
> I noticed this yesterday when working on broken relations... It doesn't
> look like an import (mostly because they used iD and the digitization looks
> like hand drawn iD) but the tagging doesn't look right. I'd say it's a
> mapping project (they called it a "draw party") with good intentions but
> that might need some tagging cleanup.
>
>
> At least the stuff I first notice looking at that in JOSM (highway=* drawn
> as polygons without an area tag and also including a landuse=residential)
> are from single commits from a mapper that was active for several months a
> few years ago. Change set claims source is Bing. Sounds like a well meaning
> but flawed contribution by a new mapper who has now moved on from OSM.
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20170322/cdcf7a7b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Talk-us mailing list