<!--/*SC*/DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"/*EC*/-->
<html><head><title></title><style type="text/css"><!-- body{padding:1ex;margin:0;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:small}a[href]{color:-moz-hyperlinktext!important;text-decoration:-moz-anchor-decoration}blockquote{margin:0;border-left:2px solid #144fae;padding-left:1em}blockquote blockquote{border-color:#006312}blockquote blockquote blockquote{border-color:#540000} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family: Arial; font-size: medium;" dir="ltr"><div>
> There is definite room for arguing that it will reduce active mapping in some situations.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
This keeps getting raised and I'm not sure how true it is.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Go and look at some of the areas that are 95-100% complete according to the ITO analysis:</div>
<div>
http://www.itoworld.com/product/data/osm_analysis/main</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Did all mapping and surveys in these areas really stop as soon as all the roads were "done"?</div>
<div>
Or did people move onto to adding houses, shops, footpaths, traffic lights, post boxes, powerlines and an infinite array of other minutiae?</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
I look at somewhere like Edinburgh and see a very detailed map with individual buildings and house numbers.</div>
<div>
Around my way I see entire towns that are completely absent from the map.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
If I lived in Edinburgh I'd be looking for fine-grained details that I could add or correct.</div>
<div>
Living where I do I just want to get a skeleton of road coverage sorted out.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Both are valid activities and benefit the map as a whole.</div>
</div></body></html>