<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
25. May 2018 20:17 by <a href="mailto:frederik@remote.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">frederik@remote.org</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;">I think the key here is, like so often, verifiability. Things in OSM<br />must be verifiable, and I'd like to add "... with reasonable effort by<br />an average person". If something is verifiable only with expensive<br />special gear by a person with a doctorate in physics, then maybe OSM is<br />not the place. Same with recurring things - if their frequency is so low<br />that the effort to verify them becomes unreasonable, then don't map.<br /></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>I completely agree with that.<br /></p><p> <br /></p><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;">My gut feeling is that something that happens once a week is reasonably<br />easy to verify. Something that happens once a month, mmh, maybe ok.<br />Something that happens once a year is, in my opinion, too hard to verify<br />and should be left out.<br /></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>I would expect limit somewhere between "once a month" and "once a year".<br /></p> </body>
</html>