Hi, this has probably been done to death, but I can find no direct reference with a search.
How much reliance can be placed on the underlying satellite imagery when marking things?
For instance, in the suburbs around where I live, many street intersections seem to be
shifted maybe 10 metres or more out of position, and the shape often does not closely follow
the actual street shape. I assume this was done in bulk based on some kind of government
survey data. But some streets are correct within a metre or less - are these ones that have
been corrected? This seems to be the case with some I have checked. Or is it where the
surveying was done right.
This mis-alignment makes adding paths, points of interest, etc a bit tricky. In particular:-
1 - do we realign the roads to suit the sat. images?
2 - do we mark additional items as per the satellite images and forget the roads? or
3 - do we take GPS positions or tracks of everything and load that into OSM? so everything
is offset (which does not seem to be the case, or
4 - do we try to offset everything according to the sat images?
My idea is to re-align roads, etc as per the sat images so that things like new tracks can be
joined up correctly.
Is there a standard for this? for correcting pre-existing markup.