[Talk-GB] not_in_map_features

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Ed Loach wrote:

> If I'd known
> I could have just gone in and revised it to make everything that
> much more logical and consistent I'd have done it already <bg>.

Map Features is there to document what we have (and by implication to 
suggest that new things could be mapped in the same way if practical).

So if you change what we have, or if you introduce something entirely 
new we didn't have before, then you should indeed amend Map Features.

Just revising Map Features on a whim without also revising the data 
would, however, be counterproductive because, as I said, Map Features is 
there to document what we have (and not to say "I'd like you to do it 
this way in the future please").

If you intend to make a large-scale change to the data that's there, 
some advance discussion is in order and you should only proceed if there 
is widespread acceptance. This does not necessarily require writing a 
proposal on the Wiki. And widespread acceptance does not mean "I called 
for a vote and of the 8 people who participated, 7 were in favour".

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"