[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Narrow width
davefox at madasafish.com
Fri Feb 19 12:15:34 GMT 2010
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Dave F. <davefox at madasafish.com
> <mailto:davefox at madasafish.com>> wrote:
> If users are so incompetent at judging distances then maybe they
> never hve picked up a GPS in the first place.
> Hey, guys, come back to the real world. As you said, putting the
> width_est is only helpful if you can compare it, which means that you
> will need a width_est in ALL highways.
Who said that? If you're referring to "estimated difference." I meant to
/If /you need to compare then it's with /everything /you've ever seen in
your whole life to there's no compulsion to add tag to all roads.
> And I'm not talking to just define a default width for the different
> highway categories.
> When I read this remark about incompetence and other threads about
> adding 2 or 3 different source tags, I think you should meet more
> average contributors before explaining how we should tag things.
So you think the accuracy of OSM should be compromised to appease users
who are unwilling to learn? Please, come back to the real world.
To get back on subject, an explanatory note as Roy W. suggests is the
best way to describe any uncertainty.
More information about the Tagging