[Imports] "readonly" tag for imported data (ask "simple" editors to not modify)?

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Wed Apr 27 01:11:09 UTC 2011


On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Jorge Gustavo Rocha <jgr at osgeopt.pt> wrote:
> Does it make sense to have administrative boundaries in OSM, since it
> isn't a "crowdsourced editable" data? Or is it?

It is.  Or, at least, it can be.  Chances are the best of the imported
data is going to be more accurate than any casual editor is going to
be able to produce, but that's true of the best imported road data, or
building polygons, or whatever.  It's also true of the best
OSM-surveyed data.

Right now the best way I can think of to indicate to others that "this
is really accurate data that you probably shouldn't be editing unless
you're really sure you're improving things" would be to use an
appropriate source tag.

The kind of imported data that I don't think should be imported is the
data that doesn't have a real world meaning that can be verified by
OSM mappers.  Administrative boundaries *can* be verified by OSM
mappers.  It's often a very difficult process, and something that
inexperienced individuals may mess up more than they help, but it is
something which can be done.  An example of data which doesn't have a
real world meaning would be the TIGER TLID.  That would be data which
isn't crowdsourced editable.  Whatever TIGER says the TIGER TLID is,
that's what it is.  That kind of stuff shouldn't be imported.



More information about the Imports mailing list