<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Aug 6, 2021, 12:13 by colin.smale@xs4all.nl:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><blockquote><div>On 08/06/2021 11:23 AM David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk> wrote:<br></div><div><br></div><div> <br></div><div>On 06/08/2021 06:57, Jay Turner wrote:<br></div><div>> Perhaps "ref:signed=poorly"?<br></div><div>> <br></div><div><br></div><div>That's subjective and OSM doesn't collect subjective information.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Ahem... There are plenty of examples of (partially) subjective information in OSM. Tracktype and smoothness for example. Even highway=* gives rise to discussion from time to time, as one mapper's judgement differs from another mapper's. Only by reference to an authoritative source can all elements of personal judgement be eliminated from the equation.<br></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">And even then we would run into problems as soon as there is more than one <br></div><div dir="auto">"authoritative source".<br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Anyway, ref:signed=poorly (ref:poorl_signed=yes seems better) is something that seems <br></div><div dir="auto">verifiable even if a bit subjective.<br></div> </body>
</html>