5 ms·
I think in this case his criticism is merited. There is plenty of open data for street addresses available, and almost certainly already in osm. Instead of link
by sgc 9y ago
I think in this case his criticism is merited. There is plenty of open data for street addresses available, and almost certainly already in osm. Instead of linking the most basic form of physical site identification -- which is basically a legal data set maintained by governments -- to their data import functionality/process, they just refuse data. Sounds off to me.
- maxerickson 9y agoPlenty of governments restrict use of their address data. Address coverage in OSM in general isn't great. There are regions that are good and then regions where there basically aren't addresses.
- sgc 9y agoI am certainly not an expert on international data access regulations. But at the same time, there is more than enough of that information publicly available to make it a basic first step in a mapping application/dataset.
- emj 9y agoOpen address has a good map that show this (http://results.openaddresses.io/ http://results.openaddresses.io/), but for any area that is grey on that map you are going to be a long way from that "basic first step" you talk about. Adress data is hard, there are so many shitty collections with bad licenses.
- sgc 9y agoThanks for that link. I dropped their coverage chart into a spreadsheet to come up with 1,184,252,000 (surely estimated) people covered by their address data - not to mention covered commercial addresses, which started this thread. My point was that there is enough green on that map, and enough obvious, critical demand, to make it a pretty fundamental feature for a mapping process, not that it would work most of the time.