[OSM-talk] House numbers... One more suggestion
siliconfiend at gmail.com
Mon Jul 28 23:40:08 BST 2008
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 3:20 PM, Charlie Echo <openstreetmap at coutiere.com>wrote:
> >> If things are clear, and if there is a consensus about using this
> Karlsruhe schema, let's have a vote on it.
> >> This will make things easier: we would then have a clean situation. This
> would enable people to enter the data.
> >I don't think you have fully understood what I was saying. The Karlsruhe
> >schema is being used, and people are already enabled to enter the data.
> Yes, I did understand.
> I even think I'll try to use it in an area of Paris to see if it's usable,
> and if it doesn't take too long to enter data.
> When I wrote "enable people to enter the data", I meant "in an efficient
> manner": people would know their data will be used and would be glad to
> enter them. For the time being, I rather consider the "Karlsruhe details" as
> a way to set-up a de facto standard. I would like to have it approved...
> Just imagine what would happen if the Karlsruhe schema is declared
> unefficient, and must be disregarded (for some reason, such as the ones
> explained by Karl). All the data would be lost, or would require huge
> processing for conversion into a new schema.
Even worse, just imagine if it were "approved"! All that data would be
useless, and new, useless data would continue to proliferate. Okay, useless
is a bit strong. More like "difficult-to-use". Don't overestimate the usage
of the current data scheme, though. The Germans are prolific mappers, but I
would be surprised if there are even a few thousand addresses entered in the
current format, if that. It might be possible to transform the existing data
into something else if anyone ever settles on a more topological format, but
like you said, it would require huge processing, just like if anyone wanted
to use it now.
Okay, I'll stop railing. I stated my case. The marketplace of ideas can
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk