OpenStreetMap
Re.: (osm.org/edit#map=16/34.9460/-111.6368)
I feel that the area in and around Munds Park, AZ has been very terribly rendered, most especially on the roads (for example, instead of showing smooth curves where they exist on the ground, they appear as jagged angles, or they do not follow the actually road path), and this is most obvious when zooming in
It is things like this that very greatly annoy me about OpenStreetMap, as it seems like someone did not wish to take the time to do the job right the first time, and now another user will have to make the adjustments and corrections to clean up the mess left behind.
I don’t know if anyone else feels the way that I do, but I just wanted to express my opinion on what could have otherwise been done properly I apologize if I am stepping on feet on this one… just trying to make OpenStreetMap a beautiful project for all to use.
Discussion
Comment from n76 on 10 May 2021 at 04:19
Looking at that area with an editor it seems it is still a bit of a “TIGER desert”. That is an area imported from a long ago version of the Census TIGER dataset (which has given imports a bad name) and hasn’t been fully cleaned up since. There are some roads that were aligned but when I look at the roads that are badly mis-aligned I don’t see that any real clean up has been done. See, for example, way/16866220 and way/16864969 where the only edits seem to have been to adjust the imported TIGER tagging.
That is not a large an area so it shouldn’t take too long for a mapper to go through and align the road network to current imagery. I might think about doing it myself even though it is a bit out of my geographical area (last time I was anywhere near there was on a trip to Sedona about 3 years ago).
If it helps any, huge portions of the US, mostly in rural areas with few local mappers, suffer from this same issue.
Comment from bryceco on 10 May 2021 at 15:08
Looks good now. Thanks n76!
Comment from Marcos Dione on 11 May 2021 at 11:01
It could also be the case where the original data comes from a GPX with very low resolution, and like @n76 says, then nobody came after and cleaned up.
Comment from Strubbl on 11 May 2021 at 17:16
Shouldn’t the tag tiger:reviewed=no be removed when the road has been reworked?
Comment from n76 on 11 May 2021 at 17:24
The rules on when to remove the tiger:reviewed tag are more like suggestions.
My personal rule is that I need to verify the name based on signage on the ground. In this case alignment and some pavement surfaces updates were made by aerial imagery, some abbreviated names expanded and a couple of names checked against newer 2019 TIGER data. But no on the ground survey to verify was done so I left the tiger:reviewed=no tags in place.
Comment from Strubbl on 11 May 2021 at 17:25
Understood. Thanks for clarifying.
Comment from CartoCrazy on 13 May 2021 at 06:59
n76 –
Thank you, thank you, thank you! That are now looks considerably better than it did before. You have restored my happiness with OSM, until I find another areat that needs a little bit of TLC.
:-)