[Talk-GB] [OSM-talk] Improving ref=* documentation

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Aug 6, 2021, 12:13 by colin.smale at xs4all.nl:

>> On 08/06/2021 11:23 AM David Woolley <forums at david-woolley.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>>  
>> On 06/08/2021 06:57, Jay Turner wrote:
>> > Perhaps "ref:signed=poorly"?
>> > 
>>
>> That's subjective and OSM doesn't collect subjective information.
>>
>
> Ahem... There are plenty of examples of (partially) subjective information in OSM. Tracktype and smoothness for example. Even highway=* gives rise to discussion from time to time, as one mapper's judgement differs from another mapper's. Only by reference to an authoritative source can all elements of personal judgement be eliminated from the equation.
>
And even then we would run into problems as soon as there is more than one 
"authoritative source".

Anyway, ref:signed=poorly (ref:poorl_signed=yes seems better) is something that seems 
verifiable even if a bit subjective.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20210806/8588c235/attachment.htm>