[Talk-us] a plea to armchair mappers

[Mike N]

On 6/11/2015 10:41 AM, Richard Welty wrote:
> i am not persuaded that these armchair mappers are paying attention. unless
> there's a big warning "this imagery is X years old" that can't be
> ignored, i think
> the information will frequently be ignored.

   I've seen this problem also - an area marked for construction, all 
roads bulldozed out, - the roads re-appear due to a TIGER<>OSM 
comparison test because they're in Bing.

  An area where all buildings are demolished and a single large entity 
takes its place, add a circle / rectangle with a NOTE around the area: 
buildings reappear because they're in Bing.

   My current strategy is to leave the original objects, just remove all 
tagging except for a note about Bing imagery dated xxxx is out of date.

   Warning that "this imagery is X years old" will produce many false 
positives.  Imagery will very frequently be older than the last edit for 
any particular object being updated.

   What about a new type of "OSM tagging for the editor"?  Tag a closed 
way with bing=out_of_date , old_date=xxxx?   Editors would recognize 
this tagging and put some sort of X indicator over the imagery if the 
imagery is still old.   Putting up a big X, a series of X's, or the 
phrase "out of date" over the imagery should catch anyone's attention.

   I wish I could find the old Email in which there was an edit war over 
a roundabout intersection that had been reworked.   Finally, someone got 
an image substituted in the editor that said "Not a Roundabout!".