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

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Jun 8, 2020, 13:18 by pla16021 at gmail.com:

> On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 at 11:31, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <> tagging at openstreetmap.org> > wrote:
>
>>
>> We are generally OK with mapping things where some traces remained.
>> It is accepted that thing totally and completely gone are not mappable.
>>
> Have these objects left traces or not? > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-52911797
> Are they mappable?
>
Good question.

I would say that not mappable, but at least (extremely rarely, given that
it was just discovered) it can be visible without digging.

But I can be OK with mapping it, at least it is visible. Very rarely.

But verifying it seems problematic at best.

I see why mapping it could be exciting but It am very dubious about it and
would be against doing that.

And in case of mapping - make 100% clear what is this and how its existence
can be verified.

(for reference in Poland there is now a discussion about importing index of archeological sites,
decision seems to be to import ones where terrain shape remained and to not
import ones visible only as discoloration of vegetation visible on aerial images)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200608/c72e3c46/attachment.htm>