OpenStreetMap
Mapping a previously traced area
ߊ߬ ߟߊߦߟߍ߬ߣߍ߲߬ ߦߋ߫ Chris Morley ߓߟߏ߫ 12 August 2008 ߦߋ߫ English ߟߋ߬ ߘߐ߫I visited a part of Flintshire where somebody had already traced the roads from Yahoo images. This was quite well done but inevitably some roads in the older, leafier areas had been missed and I'm not sure that it took me less time, either in the field or when editing, than if the tracing had not been done. More importantly I enjoyed the experience less. In virgin territory you feel like an explorer; when just collecting street names you feel like a train-spotter.
Discussion
ߡߙߌߣߊ߲ ߞߊ߬ ߝߘߊ߫ RichardB ߟߊ߫ 12 August 2008 at 18:16 ߘߐ߫
I don't really see the point of just tracing if you have no intention of visiting the location to collect street names or POI etc. Fine if it is going to be done as part of a 2-stage mapping process; in my opinion not useful if roads are just traced. I agree Chris that it often takes longer to map than if the tracing had not been done - particularly if ways need to be split - ways need to be cut where 2 roads come close but don't actually meet in reality etc. etc. It's often quicker just deleting the original stuff and mapping in the usual way afterwards.
ߡߙߌߣߊ߲ ߞߊ߬ ߝߘߊ߫ Biogenesis_ ߟߊ߫ 13 August 2008 at 04:16 ߘߐ߫
On the flipside a traced area is still useful for navigation, and could cause more people to join in as they can see the project's potential.
But yeah, exploring virgin territory is great fun :). At least in Australia there's lots of country towns with only low resolution coverage.
Of course, I'm pro-tracing, since that's how I've mapped my home town so far :p. It makes the map look cool quickly. Especially if you mark bushland, water and landuse on the way through!