[Talk-us] Completing the Appalachian Trail relation

[Adam Schreiber]

There used to be a shelters/springs data set that would probably be
useful to include.

Cheers,
Adam

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Richard Welty <rwelty at averillpark.net> wrote:
> On 11/27/13 10:51 AM, Josh Doe wrote:
>
>> I agree with you. What about attributes, anything useful
>> we should import when possible? I can't view the data now,
>> but I believe I saw SURFACE and CLUB which might be
>> useful. A whole lot of unneeded GPS info.
>
> i'm not keeping any of it, the source tag points back to the
> original data set and that should be sufficient. if we want
> club info, i'd suggest breaking up the relations where
> needed and adding the clubs to those rather to the ways.
> i don't know that i see a mapping from the AT surface
> attributes to our surface tag, and an AT:surface tag would
> be largely ignored by OSM users (how many pay any attention
> at all to tiger: tags now? i know i look at some of them, but
> most people don't.)
>
> we have a long standing habit of keeping attributes that
> turn out to not to add any value to OSM. i'm tending to
> be very spare about what i carry over these days (usually
> nothing).
>
> richard
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>