[OSM-talk] GeoBase nodes import
acrosscanadatrails at gmail.com
Thu Dec 18 10:42:28 GMT 2008
Thanks Tom & D,
storage requirements, which is why I have concerns about creating tens
>> of millions of nodes which have many duplicated tags or which will wind
>> up never being used and will just be deleted again.
> If it's only 10 tiles of 12539, why bother with importing anything at all
> for those 10 tiles automatically and instead have those areas manually
> merged in?
What about just importing the nodes for these 10 tiles?
This way, the mappers in these areas, can go down to the next level of
detail, and add in more features like building outlines, grass areas, things
that were missed. .. but having them as nodes so they don't mess up the map.
> For the 100 where roads would be omitted, surely again a manual merge of
> that road data for those 100 would be the best solution... Then, as Tom
> says, you only have to share the OSM files for the data to the people who
> are taking responsibility for massaging the data in rather than putting in
This happened for the AND import... but for Canada, i think we'd like
something better. (if possible)
And so, im not sure that the local are mappers would want to have a manual
merge (wiping out what they did, importing all the roads, then slowely
bringing back the OSM roads if any are needed)
By having the roads which were not mapped available as nodes to be traced,
we are not wiping out what the mapper did.
The mapper takes priority :)
And yes, for the 10-100 tiles, there is no need to import just the nodes for
everything else... as this everything else will be imported as shape/line
files. ... and so having just the nodes for the roads to be traced would
make sense here.
And for the 100 - 12,539, your both right. there would be no need to have a
big Canada node-dump.
For the updates-
These are available as a much smaller file size, so having the nodes
available, so as mappers see them, they can be manually flipped to an OSM
map feature. (flipped=most of the GeoBase reference removed, accept the
For nodes on nodes-
i think this would only be in the few cases where the OSM mapper was
identical to the import.
Thanks for the help in re-defining what the idea is :)
Now just to translate it for the wiki (but i think i'll wait a day or so for
more feed-back from others.
Hopefully this makes a little more sense, :)
Across Canada Trails
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk