[Talk-us] Who controls data: Google Maps, others erasing Hollywood sign, but it's in OSM

[Paul Johnson]

I'm willing to argue both cases.  Having a role=label relation may be
useful where it may be otherwise ambiguous to properly form a cogent
label.  However, in the Hollywood sign's case, just rendering each letter
as a label would be obvious to most people (albeit somewhat unusual) and
helpful (since it's possible navigate in Hollywood relative to the H and
the D in that sign, something that I generally do to orient myself since,
despite having lived just over the hills in the valley for a number of
years, I never learned the street names out of a lack of need).

On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 3:05 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com
> wrote:

>
> 2014-11-27 18:04 GMT+01:00 Brad Neuhauser <brad.neuhauser at gmail.com>:
>
>> Could you include the new node in the relation as role=label? That's at
>> least somewhat documented...
>
>
>
>
> mapping "labels" is generally disputed, as a label is something the
> dataconsumer creates to display information, it is not actual information
> to describe the world, that would belong into the osm database.
>
> cheers,
> Martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20141128/ace9f010/attachment.html>