<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/12/20 9:36 pm, Colin Smale wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:01c268bc72564bdf5beb2cc819508bae@xs4all.nl">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p>On 2020-12-01 11:14, Warin wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left:
#1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">The differences are less than 10m.
(The points of the green track are where data exists, the
straight lines between those points simply connect the
measured points. )</div>
<p>The 'simplify way' in JOSM is normal set for a maximum
difference of 3m as a way of reducing data bloat while
sacrificing some accuracy.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>What accuracy is optimal for OSM? Why should we sacrifice any
accuracy at all? Who chose 3m as a tolerance figure? That sounds
rather high to me - it's the width of a small road, or half a
house. If we are going to draw a line at all, I would go for
something <= 1m.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>In some instances the 3m distorted the feature I was dealing
with. When I set it to 1.5m the result was a good represeentation
of the feature. So I deal with the resulting representation of the
feature. <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>--------------------</p>
<p>I note that some roads in OSM are straight lines between towns ..
while in the real world they are far from straight. This has to
deal with the road exists but mappers have limited time to enter
data. Only in places where local mappers have mapped most things
that the details are mapped better are 'accuracies' of some
discussion. <br>
</p>
</body>
</html>