<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>Feb 12, 2020, 00:07 by talk@openstreetmap.org:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div style="font-family: verdana, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" class=""><div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr">Feb 11, 15:59, stevea wrote :<br></div><div><br></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span>> Rather than get snarled in counter-examples, let's discuss how OTG isn't
and can't be strictly </span><br></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span>> followed in many cases. It IS followed in the
majority of cases, but in those corner cases where </span><br></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span>> it isn't, because it
can't be ("nothing" is OTG), must be realistically addressed, likely in
our wiki </span><br></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span>> where we state the "rule" today, though going forward much
better state a "guideline". I think </span><br></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><span>> we can get there, but it remains
under discussion / construction.</span><br></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr">I agree with this and I adds some other aspects to take into account below. The areas not yet mapped in OSM have characteristics quite different than the industrialiased regions / countries. And we cannot realistically count on mappers to walk or cycle through huge isolated areas. We cannot expect people that figth to survive, that have no good internet connexion to map intensively there neighboorhood. And more then mappers, we need to think where we need to revise OSM. <br></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div>Note that it is not violating OTG. OTG is not "everything must be mapped on survey", it means<br></div><div>that direct survey (what is actually existing) overrides official data, opinions and desires.<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div style="font-family: verdana, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" class=""><div><div data-setdir="false" dir="ltr">If we could keep the wood landcover outside of OSM, it would greatly simplify mapping of such areas and dramatically reduce the Mulipolygons problems where huge multipolygons are created with inner for lakes and all the problems related to this.<br></div></div></div></blockquote><div>??? just do not create unreasonably large multipolygons (or split existing, possibly undo import<br></div><div>if it makes area uneditable and do it right).<br></div> </body>
</html>