<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt"><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;"><br><br><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;">----- Original Message ----<br>From: David William Bitner <david.bitner@gmail.com><br><br>> I'm having a hard time finding specifics of what's been done between<br>> 2006 and 2007, but the thing to watch are when counties have been<br>> updated through the MAF/TIGER improvement project<br>> (<a href="http://www.census.gov/geo/mod/maftiger.html" target="_blank">http://www.census.gov/geo/mod/maftiger.html</a>). I can find a list of<br>> counties that are still *not* updated --<br><a href="http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2007/tgrshp07nomtaip.txt" target="_blank">>
http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2007/tgrshp07nomtaip.txt</a> --<br>> but it would be really nice to just have a list of when each county<br>> has been updated to the new standards. The above list would<br>> definitely be a starting point as to where OSM would likely be better<br>> (at a minimum it would indicate minimal changes from the already<br>> imported TIGER data in OSM).<br><br>200 million contract to update TIGER!! The quality better be outstanding!<br><br>If they had only asked, we could have saved them tons of money.<br><br>Anyhow, thanks for the link David, helpful.<br></div></div></div></body></html>