[Talk-us] Comparing Tiger 2017 dataset with OSM in a automatedway.

Greg Morgan dr.kludge.gm at gmail.com
Thu Oct 26 18:56:52 UTC 2017

On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:00 AM, OSM Volunteer stevea <
steveaOSM at softworkers.com> wrote:

> Thank you, Tod.  Yes, I MIGHT find a VERY SELECT SUBSET of these data
> SOMEWHAT useful, as minor amounts of them seem to be accurate and
> more-up-to-date enough to introduce into OSM.  But certainly not using any
> sort of automated method.  Essentially, every single datum would need to be
> human-reviewed, possibly corrected, likely conflated, and for a great many
> of them, on-the-ground verified.  I'd say "garbage" seems too strong, but
> "very noisy with a highly limited potential to add some minor value to our
> map, coupled with great effort to vet, improve and enter the data" seems
> about right.
> SteveA
> California
Yep! While not good for an import the data is useful for comparison.  I see
where I could pick up some road names and new subdivisions from Badita's
data. A more useful comparison would be an update to Alex Barth's "Better
Than OSM" tiles.  Does anyone on the list know of a friend of a friend at
MapBox?  Would you please ask them to update Alex's work?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20171026/9ee44680/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Talk-us mailing list