[OSM-talk] Merging data sets (was: web site map enhancement, los angeles)

[Etienne Cherdlu]

On 4/7/06, Tom Carden <tom at tom-carden.co.uk> wrote:
> On 4/7/06, Dan Karran <dan at karran.net> wrote:
> >
> > I also believe it should be a manual process, but with the amount of
> > data in question, that process is going to have to be simplified to
> > avoid overwhelming users with masses of data. As Imi says, we need
> > coders. If only I knew Java... (I sense the onset of a sharp learning
> > curve)
>
> Using the API, you could write a tool in whatever language you wanted.
>  This is a specialised task, not one that the main OSM applet really
> needs to be able to deal with all the time.

If TIGER data was imported with, say, <tag k="TIGER" v="true"/><tag
k="read-only" v="true"/> then it would be possible for the server to
reject regular updates to these nodes and segments.  If there was then
some easy way to copy elements from this 'layer' to the normal layer
we could have the best of both worlds.

Rendering clients could choose whether to display or ignore TIGER
data, depending on what they are trying to achieve.

> Regarding import of TIGER as a static 'gps-like' layer - do people
> really think manually tracing and correcting TIGER on OSM would be a
> useful application of their time?  I would think that even for areas
> with a reasonable amount of existing data, TIGER would be at least an
> order of magnitude more complete right now.  With respect to those
> who've been working on OSM in the US, I doubt we'd be losing much (but
> of course we should check).

There is significant work that has been done in the Washington DC
area.  Apart from that I've dabbled in California a bit.  I don't know
of anything else.

I doubt that much of the stuff that I did in California (canyon
walking) will be in TIGER, although I'm sure all of the freeways will
be (but are HOV lanes, for example, recorded separately in TIGER?).

Etienne
(Forgot to reply to the list again)