[Tagging] landuse:illegal and illegal:yes/no

Nathan Edgars II neroute2 at gmail.com
Wed Mar 30 09:35:18 BST 2011


On 3/30/2011 3:00 AM, Peter Gervai wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 02:59, Serge Wroclawski<emacsen at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> For example, if I see waste water dumping, is this now illegal=yes?
>> What if someone else doesn't think it's illegal? Now it has to go to
>> court. And that's where it belongs.
>
> What OSM does care about that? We tag the illegal dumping, so people
> who like to avoid hiking in sewers wouldn't go there, or local cleanup
> teams can filter on the objects and go after it, or whatever purpose
> people can figure. If someone complains that it isn't illegal, I'd say
> we probably happily remove the tag, and put a note that someone
> claimed it, that's great, we fixed an object information with source.
Why do we care if it's illegal? What we would care about is that there's 
hazardous waste in the water, whether or not it's legal.

> You have your decision making in your head. Why would you tag it as
> illegal? For example if I see a concrete pipe which clearly 100 years
> old I wouldn't, but when I see one hiding under bushes and clearly
> built this spring I'd say it's hardly "legal", and I would give good
> chance to courts say the same if they would care at all (which they
> really don't, mind you).
If it's hiding under bushes that may be for visual mitigation purposes. 
It may very well be legal in many places to dump bad stuff into water, 
especially if that water is a closed basin or upstream of some beefy 
filtering equipment. As I said above, a theoretical swimmer doesn't care 
if it's legal - he wants to know that there's something bad there, 
period. So hazard=factory regularly dumps benzene in water is much more 
useful than illegal=yes (and more correct if the dumping is legal).




More information about the Tagging mailing list