Sometimes I'll encounter things with tagging indicating its government, project, survey, or other concrete source. If the object itself it is now wrong, should the tagging just be ignored and object fixed? Are there any tags or info should add to indicate it has been moved or otherwise updated?

Examples:

  1. Closed way for landuse surrounding parts of a village. Now badly wrong. Sometimes completely enclosed in an accurate landuse area. Old one tagged: {landuse=residential, source:date=2014, source=ehealthafrica.org}
  2. A formally defined area where the ground truth is that at some point it was nonetheless clearly reshaped (cut into for housing in most cases), tagged: {leisure=nature_reserve, source=USFS Shapefile from http://www.vcgi.org/dataware}
  3. a swamp with an outline that has greatly shrunk to scrub, but was tagged source=NJ2002LULC
  4. badly wrong streets with badly wrong tags, and lots of tiger: tags. After I fix them, leave the TIGER info in any case? tiger seems to be a special case since there's so much. Is there more info about handling tiger info / that process anywhere?
  5. now obsolete shapes of natural=wood, or landuse=retail, but with mystery codes in the tags.

asked 07 Jul, 23:10

Joel%20D%20Reid's gravatar image

Joel D Reid
1361614
accept rate: 0%

edited 08 Jul, 00:56

As for my own question, "is there more info about handling tiger," there is this Key:tiger:reviewed wiki article, which notably includes, “Some mappers object to the tag since it implies a process of review and "moderation" of edits, which does not exist.” See also: the TIGER fixup article.

(08 Jul, 13:14) Joel D Reid

If you keep an object but alter its shape or properties according to aerial imagery, and the object has source tags, then remove the source tags as they would now be misleading. If necessary, the object history can be retrieved to find out exactly what has been added from what source.

If the object has a concrete ID that links it to a data source it was imported from (something like xyzcounty_building_ref=1234) it might make sense to check with whoever ran the import; it is possible that they are still running some sort of update process and while that should never overwrite something in OSM, always better to double check, and discuss whether keeping or removing the ID is best.

As for TIGER, I'd say if you have verified that the data is correct (or modified it to be correct) you should remove the tiger_reviewed=no; other than that, I'd suggest to ask on the talk-us mailing list for general practice with TIGER stuff.

permanent link

answered 08 Jul, 09:54

Frederik%20Ramm's gravatar image

Frederik Ramm ♦
77.6k886901200
accept rate: 24%

Thank you very much for your answer. Very helpful.

(08 Jul, 13:15) Joel D Reid
Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:

×25
×17

question asked: 07 Jul, 23:10

question was seen: 226 times

last updated: 08 Jul, 13:15

powered by OSQA