[Tagging] Delete vs Removed LSP?

[Dave F]

On 28/04/2022 12:38, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
>
>
>
> 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.

Eyes/Camera/Notebook

>
> 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.

Unsure why you think that validates the problem.

DaveF

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20220428/ef6cc68c/attachment.htm>