[Tagging] [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

[Warin]

On 30/5/20 12:48 am, Volker Schmidt wrote:
> My main point is that out there are things that consist of visible 
> objects plus objects which have left visible traces, and also some 
> pieces that have been completely erased, but of which we have 
> documented knowledge of where they once were. The entire thing makes 
> sense only with all its parts. These things be of interest for some 
> end users of OSM data, and hence, if someone has gone to the length of 
> mapping them, should find space in OSM.
> In my view a general rule that any mapper can erase any object from 
> the map, when he does not see any trace of it, is certainly not 
> correct , he may be removing parts of the thing thsat only with all 
> its partsmakes sense.


Where an old railway line has been built over by houses, factories, 
shops and roads I see no reason to retain the (historical) information 
in OSM.

The old railway station that still exists at one end - yes, but where 
there is nothing, not even a hint, left then no.


> Anyway i am against removing apparently useless data without 
> consultation with the author, with the exception of clear errors.



Disagree.

Once the data is in OSM it is no longer the 'property' of the author or 
following editors.

If I am not certain of something I'll ask the author/flowing editors but 
where I know something is wrong I'll change it without consultation.