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

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Mon Jun 8 12:43:40 UTC 2020




Jun 8, 2020, 14:28 by pla16021 at gmail.com:

> On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 at 12:41, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <> tagging at openstreetmap.org> > wrote:
>
>>
>> Jun 8, 2020, 13:18 by >> pla16021 at gmail.com>> :
>>
>>> Have these objects left traces or not? >>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-52911797
>>> Are they mappable?
>>>
>> But verifying it seems problematic at best.
>>
>
> Unless there is a requirement that anything mapped by aerial imagery must
> be compared in two independent sets of imagery, I don't see a problem.
>
For example http://blog.imagico.de/verifiability-and-the-wikipediarization-of-openstreetmap/
promotes much stricter verification requirements.

I am not sure whatever I would want go so far, but mapping something
appearing in a single aerial imagery seem not ideal.


> have aerial imagery of these (but whether or not it is ever made available to
> us under appropriate copyright terms is another matter).  Verification is a
> matter of somebody else looking at the same imagery and reaching the
> same conclusion.
>
>>
>>
>> I see why mapping it could be exciting but It am very dubious about it and
>> would be against doing that.
>>
>
> I doubt the imagery will be released in a form we can use.  But it might be.
>
>>
>> (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)
>>
>  
> I wouldn't map vegetation discolouration as indicative of anything because I
> don't have the expertise to tell what it means.  But if experts at a governmental
> heritage organization determine that the discolouration is the result of a particular
> historical feature and designates it as a nationally important archaeological
> site then I might map it as such (that designation would put it under legal
> protection and it would be a criminal act to dig it up).
>
Yes, official recognition (or ven better - placing information board or something there)
would push it toward "lets map this".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200608/e7709887/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list