[Tagging] inconsistencies in bridge

[Nathan Edgars II]

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Dave F. <davefox at madasafish.com> wrote:
>  On 28/09/2010 02:41, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:35 PM, Dave F.<davefox at madasafish.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>>  On 28/09/2010 01:41, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Strawman. We're only talking about former railway alignments.
>>>
>>> Hmm... not sure you understand the meaning of the straw man argument.
>>>
>>> -----
>>>
>>> You're (sic) statement "Because we don't only map what's currently
>>> there." proves
>>> you (&  I) have moved the discussion on to include all data.
>>
>> False dichotomy. There's a big difference between mapping only what's
>> current and mapping everything that has ever existed.
>
> Err... Yes?! That's been a part of my point all along - a big increase in
> data clutter!

You don't understand. There are various points along the way; it's not
an either-or. Just because we map some non-current features doesn't
mean we map all. Just because we draw individual lots in urban centers
doesn't mean we do the same in homogenous suburbs.