[OSM-talk] Is *just* tracing useful?

[Richard Fairhurst]

I'm starting to wonder if this "half-mapping" - whether from Yahoo or  
GPXs  
(http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2007-June/014827.html),  
it's the same either way - is something we're unconsciously borrowing  
from Wikipedia.

Wikipedia has this little activity of wiki gardening, where people go  
around and tidy up the wiki. Basically, they're trying to help,  
they're probably kind of addicted to Wikipedia in some way, and so  
they go round tidying articles, categorising, correcting grammar, etc.  
etc. There are thousands of people doing that on Wikipedia. It works  
well(-ish) there.

How do you do that on OSM? Well, one way is that you start tracing  
places you've never been, because you think it's helpful.

I agree that generally it _isn't_. Where landuse is visible from  
hi-res Yahoo imagery, then sure, draw a few lakes and thickets, that's  
really great. But roads where you've never been and aren't immediately  
planning to go? I fail to see the point. It makes the map look more  
complete than it is, and it's a PITA for the person who's going to tag  
it up properly.

(Also, people sometimes do it as unwayed segments, but that's a thread  
for another day.)

Tracing's great, Yahoo! imagery's great, guessing isn't.

cheers
Richard