<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">No, sounds too simple and sensible.<br><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small">Cheerio John<br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 16 July 2015 at 13:22, Tom Taylor <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com" target="_blank">tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Why not the source tag? If it indicates survey or local knowledge instead of or as well as remote imagery, credibility is improved.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Tom Taylor</font></span><span class=""><br>
<br>
On 16/07/2015 1:02 PM, john whelan wrote:<br>
</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">
I think a two tiered system would work well. Officialverified=yes<br>
perhaps? I don't think rendering is an issue. Certainly I've seen JOSM<br>
used to render or view maps on a lap top for an area. I was quite<br>
surprised but the person said an off line map was easily searchable and<br>
you could select and see all the tags.<br>
<br>
Cheerio John<br>
<br>
On 16 July 2015 at 11:13, Steve Bower <<a href="mailto:steve@worldvista.net" target="_blank">steve@worldvista.net</a><br></span><span class="">
<mailto:<a href="mailto:steve@worldvista.net" target="_blank">steve@worldvista.net</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
A fundamental problem is that the current road/path tagging scheme<br>
does not distinguish between:<br>
<br>
•"rough" tagging used for remote mapping during activations, and<br>
•"detailed" tagging based on local knowledge.<br>
<br>
Current tags are used for both, which leads to confusion since the<br>
custom "activation" definition may differ somewhat from the<br>
"permanent" definition. Also, there is future confusion since the<br>
level of detail (local knowledge) is not recorded.<br>
<br>
A 2-tier scheme could solve that, with separate tags for "rough"<br>
tagging, and "detailed" tags based on local knowledge.<br>
<br>
Another solution would be a separate tag recording the level of<br>
certainty or verification, but a 2-tier scheme might be easier to<br>
manage and to render.<br>
<br>
~~Steve<br>
<br>
<br></span>
...<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote></div><br></div>