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

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 06.08.21 12:13, Colin Smale wrote:
> 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.

Nonetheless we should always *strive* to avoid subjective judgement, and
introducing tags that invite more subjective judgement is certainly
something that would need very good reasons to go ahead.

> Only by reference to an authoritative source can all elements of personal judgement be eliminated from the equation.

Unsure what you understand as an authoritative source here. If this is
referring to "what someone else has in their database" then no, such
authoritative sources don't square with what we're doing in OSM and
while they might eliminate personal judgement, they introduce other
problems. (We want to map what *is*, not what someone else thinks or has
recorded.)

If you are saying that the authoritative source for the width of a road
is a tape measure, then yes, that's an excellent authoritative source.

Bye
Frederik

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