<head><style>body{font-size:10pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-color:#ffffff;color:black;}p{margin:0px;}</style></head><body><font size="2">Hello - I have been prone to including walls in the mapping, not because they help to delineate travel routes (access to contents of walled compounds) but because of the apparent protection they would provide against flooding as the areas I have mapped appear to be in the midst of intermittent heavy water flows (and I have been tracing major apparent waterflow paths as waterway=wadi).</font><div><br></div><div><font size="2">However, I agree that this is not part of the minimum to be counted toward completion of an area. I've found a few areas where an editor has marked an area as done with the completion note something like 'but buildings are not mapped' -- I've reverted these completions and returned the areas to the work pool. I suggest that upon closing an area, you indicate "compound walls present but not mapped", again though as a non-essential addition to the commentary on a region.</font></div><div><font size="2"><br></font></div><div><font size="2">Regards -- ceyockey (Courtland)</font></div></body>