[Tagging] [OSM-talk-be] Zones 30 in Belgium
A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com
Wed Nov 21 23:02:00 GMT 2012
On 2012-11-21 21:40, Ben Laenen wrote :
> On Wednesday 21 November 2012 21:16:24 A.Pirard.Papou wrote:
>> Can we spend the time you speak of checking that everyone's favorite
>> Inspector is highlighting the errors and that they are not masking other
>> errors or pissing off people.
> Ugh, this isn't about pissing off people, this is about importing data, and
> importing data has to follow a set of guidelines:
> And that said, I don't think we should add nodes to the database which are at
> some random point near a zone 30 (like the one in Brussels spanning a few
> square kilometers...). But at the very least you'll have to check each node to
> see if it's already mapped on the road.
> But I have a problem with this: if some application wants to use the data, the
> maxspeed has to be mapped on the road anyway, which requires local survey of
> where the zone starts and ends. It can't make use of a node somewhere near the
> road. So this would in fact be mapping for the mapper...
I hope it's clear that I don't mean uploading that data to stay.
It's just for people to spot work to do, do it and delete the node.
An application using speed data must ignore maxspeed on nodes.
Or warn about the error which is exactly what we want.
If we put it in a list somewhere or on OSB, no one will look at it.
If we produce OSM* errors, taggers will find them and they're usually
working in their neighbo[u]rhood.
But I won't fight for my idea if someone wants to make sth else.
Well, it seems we are inventing something: introducing in OSMI/OSMOSE
errors for missing data (we have partial data). In specific words, if
we could sort of upload that data to the OSM* databases without
uploading bogus data to OSM itself, and clear the condition (remove
that OSM* data after OSM fix), no one could be unhappy.
This is why I like to share this kind of discussion with Tagging. In
case there would be a leak.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging