[OHM] [diversity-talk] Anyone with an interest in history should not contribute to OSM?

[Pieren]

On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Rob Nickerson <rob.j.nickerson at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, the maps in question are hostoric, but they may still contain usefull
> info. For example, names of topographical features that don't have signs on
> the ground.

About this, I just wanted to say that in France, we use instensively
the land registry (cadastre) to add places, topological, fields, farms
or localities names which are not signed on the ground. We do that
since years ... with JOSM ;-)
We see the online editors as an entry point in OSM or only good enough
for small contributions. Once people are familiar with the projet and
want to use more various sources, we always strongly recommend to
switch to the java editor. I guess that the use of your historical
maps could follow the same way. I just have one concern about
historical maps : it is hard to distinguish what is still valid for
today and what is obsolete. Some contributors will not take care and
add much more than what is real at present time. Such sources need
special warnings.

Pieren