[Tagging] Delete vs Removed LSP?

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Thu Apr 28 11:38:50 UTC 2022




Apr 28, 2022, 13:14 by tagging at openstreetmap.org:

>
>
> On 26/04/2022 10:30, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>>
>> sent from a phone
>>
>>> On 25 Apr 2022, at 15:55, Dave F via Tagging <tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> How far back should we go? i live in a Roman city. That's a /lot/ of removed data.
>>>
>>
>> seems like a red herring to me, or do you have knowledge about all this data back until ancient roman times?
>>
>
> No. And /that's/ the point. As I don't have conclusive knowledge about it, I don't add it.
> Presuming is bad for the OSM database.
>
> The 'removed;' prefix is a sticking plaster to cover up the symptoms of a problem, & doesn't prevent the cause.
> I wouldn't want OSM to be full of Band-aids.
>
Note that you never can be 100% sure unless you map with Vespucci or Go Map!! on site.

Even mapping just next to place where I live I sometimes would map no longer
existing building if demolished:building=yes area would be not present.

(I also consistently remove attempts to map nonexisting features that are not going
to be mistakenly mapped)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20220428/a054cc51/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list