<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 05/10/19 20:34, Mateusz Konieczny
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:LqQU91T--3-1@tutanota.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div style="16px" text-align="left"><br>
</div>
<div style="16px" text-align="left"><br>
</div>
<div style="16px" text-align="left"><br>
</div>
<div style="16px" text-align="left">5 Oct 2019, 01:44 by
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com">61sundowner@gmail.com</a>:</div>
<blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid
#93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;">
<pre>The problem here is that some raise the "not map the interior
private roads in detail" as not mapping them at all
</pre>
</blockquote>
<div style="16px" text-align="left">Are they not mapping them or
also <br>
</div>
<div style="16px" text-align="left">(incorrectly) deleting what
others <br>
</div>
<div style="16px" text-align="left">mapped?</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I am aware of 2 cases of deletion. In both cases at least some of
the information has been re-added, possibly with access tagging too.
<br>
I have not looked into it too deeply. Not too interested in the past
practices or attitudes, but what principle should we adopt?<br>
<br>
I am seeking thoughts on the mapping these roads/tracks within
OSM... should we map them and if so how detailed? <br>
<br>
As I see it the options are;<br>
<br>
* Do not map.<br>
* Map the entry only.<br>
* Map it all.<br>
<br>
Add an access tag if thought appropriate, possibly err on the side
of restriction (tag access=private) rather than public (no access
tag)?<br>
</body>
</html>