[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Place areas

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Mon Jun 19 21:01:20 UTC 2017


On 06/19/2017 05:31 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> If you can't point to a sign on the ground, don't map topoynms.
> -1, our criterion for mapping something is that it can be verified, signs are only a part of it. 

*Ideally* verified on the ground, but yes, other means of verifiability
can be acceptable. However, the OP in this case explicitly said that
"The extent of a settlement is not explicitly defined" which certainly
thwarts *any* kind of verification, doesn't it?


Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

More information about the Tagging mailing list