<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Grunt: <b>g</b>uesstimate, not <b>q</b>uesstimate</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2018-11-13 16:16, Sergio Manzi
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:1dc6f07f-cece-d79b-d996-fdbf45bb4a09@smz.it">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p>Sorry, typo: <b>g</b>uestimate, not <b>q</b>uestimate!!<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2018-11-13 16:07, Sergio Manzi
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:64e4777c-4939-730b-454c-eb5d88bb46e0@smz.it">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<p>Yeah, agreed. And I think in our context "<i>estimate</i>"
should be more taken as "<i>quesstimate</i>", i.e. "<i>a first
rough approximation pending a more accurate estimate, or it
may be an educated guess at something for which no better
information will become available</i>" [1].</p>
<p>Now... how do we tag this... "<i>thing</i>"? :-)</p>
<p>My personal idea is that it should be:</p>
<p> <b>either</b></p>
<blockquote>
<p><tt><i>measure</i>:accuracy=estimate (e.g.: height=10 +
"height:accuracy=estimate")</tt></p>
</blockquote>
<p><b>or</b></p>
<blockquote>
<p><tt>accuracy:<i>measure</i>=estimate (e.g.: </tt><tt><tt>height=10
+ </tt>"accuracy:height=estimate")</tt><br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<p><b>and</b></p>
<blockquote>
<p>get rid of all the est_* tags (e.g.: est_height=10)</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Cheers!</p>
<p>Sergio</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>[1] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guesstimate"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guesstimate</a><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2018-11-13 15:47, OSMDoudou
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-cd2d6e0b-1fc5-46c6-ae0c-66f7c9e2a410-1542120474796@msvc-mesg-gmx021">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
In hopefully simple words, an estimate would be a measure
which doesn't meet your precision need or doesn't meet your
trust criteria of the measure or of the measuring person.<br>
<br>
So, they way it was measured is factual information the mapper
should share, so that the data consumer can determine for
itself if it's good enough for him.<br>
<br>
Without telling how it was measured, one cannot assess
accuracy. And "site survey" wouldn't be a good explanation
because it says nothing about the accuracy of the tool used
nor about the qualification of the measuring person to use the
tool adequately.<br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" moz-do-not-send="true">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>