[Tagging] Facts and opinions
61sundowner at gmail.com
Wed Jan 9 22:59:47 UTC 2019
On 10/01/19 05:27, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> Jan 8, 2019, 10:33 PM by graemefitz1 at gmail.com:
> On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 23:36, Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch
> <mailto:simon at poole.ch>> wrote:
> I'm not convinced that we really want to model such a level of
> detail in the first place,
> Agree with you there!
> If the place is a shop=tyres, isn't that really all that OSM needs
> to say?
> I am fine with tagging more detailed info. But I would be equally fine
> with deleting any
> outdated detailed info.
> & where do we stop with extreme details?
> At level where mappers are unwilling to maintain up to date information.
Some time ago I came across a section of road that, in OSM, used an old
That bridge had not been there for quite some time, the new one was
evident in imagery.
Should that section of road be deleted because 'no one is maintaining
It is a section of main highway in Australia. I think it needs to stay,
even if the detail is wrong .. there will still be a highway through
Shops too may come and go .. but physically the 'shop' structure remains.
So what happens when 'no one is maintaining it'? It may get out of date
.. have incorrect information .. and when someone finds it they can
This may get us a new mapper. Yes the map may get some abuse .. but it
will get abuse anyway if the information is absent.
So I am for putting it in - even if it becomes stale.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging