<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>May 25, 2020, 17:34 by colin.smale@xs4all.nl:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><p>On 2020-05-25 17:08, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote:<br></p><blockquote style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0" type="cite"><div>May 25, 2020, 16:48 by colin.smale@xs4all.nl:<br></div><blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;" class="tutanota_quote"><p>On 2020-05-25 16:20, Jack Armstrong wrote:<br></p><blockquote style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0;"><div style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><div><span><span style="" class=""><span class="font" style="font-family:Roboto, sans-serif">Why are railways given a special status?</span></span></span><br></div></div></blockquote><div style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><div><span><span style="" class=""><span class="font" style="font-family:Roboto, sans-serif">Nobody gives anything a status in OSM. Nothing is "approved" so nothing is "forbidden" either.</span></span></span><br></div></div></blockquote><div>It is not really accurate - there is plenty of forbidden things (like running<br></div><div>imports without discussion, we have tags that are silently removed by<br></div><div>editors like iD and JOSM).<br></div></blockquote><div>Doing imports without discussion more about the process, and less about the details of the result. An import can be declared "bad" for many reasons.<br></div><div> <br></div><div>If iD and JOSM remove certain tags when they are encountered, that is different from removing whole objects.<br></div></blockquote><div>OK, though that is much narrower than "Nothing is "approved" so nothing is "forbidden" either."<br></div><div>claim.<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><blockquote style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0" type="cite"><div>We have voted on tags that are described as "approved".<br></div><div> <br></div><div>Even if "<span><span><span style="" class=""><span class="font" style="font-family:Roboto, sans-serif">Nothing is "approved"</span></span></span></span>" is true it does not mean that nothing is forbidden.<br></div></blockquote><div>Can you name one tag that is "forbidden"? Does that mean a standing instruction to all mappers to remove it whenever it is found, or a license to do a seek-and-destroy across the whole database? Or does "forbidden" not quite mean "may not appear in OSM"? "Frowned upon" possibly.<br></div></blockquote><div>I would say that<br></div><div><br></div><div>"Does that mean a standing instruction to all mappers to remove it whenever it is found,<br></div><div>or a license to do a seek-and-destroy across the whole database?"<br></div><div><br></div><div>applies to several things (listed below).<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><blockquote style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0" type="cite"><div style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><div>Is there any case of a whole class of objects being removed from OSM on the grounds <br></div><div><span><span style="" class=""><span class="font" style="font-family:Roboto, sans-serif">that they "do not belong"? Who would burn their fingers on that?</span></span></span><br></div></div><div>Depends on what you mean by "whole class of objects".<br></div></blockquote><div>Class, category, whatever... A subset of the objects in the OSM data with common characteristics.<br></div><div style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><div> <br></div></div><blockquote style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0" type="cite"><div style="font-size: 13px; color: #000000; font-family: arial, sans-serif;"><div> <br></div><div><span><span style="" class=""><span class="font" style="font-family:Roboto, sans-serif">If we are looking to set a precedent for that it would probably be wiser to pick on a less controversial and emotive subject.</span></span></span><br></div><div> <br></div></div><div>We have precedent that entire classes and types of things are<br></div><div>out of scope.<br></div></blockquote><div>Where is that written down? What classes and types of things have been declared out of scope? <br></div></blockquote><div>For example things that I immediately remember<br></div><div><br></div><div>- fictional objects<br></div><div>- blatantly subjective things like reviews, ratings<br></div><div>- mapping of private objects (location of my bed)<br></div><div>- mapping of moving objects (location of myself or a moving ship or plane)<br></div><div>- completely gone objects (for railways the question is when railway is fully gone)<br></div><div>- personal detail (ties into subjective ones) like "my favorite trees", or "towns I visited"<br></div><div>- objects on Moon/Mars and other locations outside Earth<br></div><div><br></div><div>there is more of that - listed here is what I immediately remembered.<br></div><div><br></div><div>> Any record of a transparent process that led to that?<br></div><div><br></div><div>Not sure if there was any formal process to establish that for<br></div><div>example we are not mapping fictional objects.<br></div> </body>
</html>