[OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass

[Martijn van Oosterhout]

On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Andy Robinson
<blackadderajr at googlemail.com> wrote:
>  On the basis that we only put data into the project relating to
>  physical objects I dont think we should put any items in that "might"
>  get built.

In general I agree, but for some things like highways I think you can
make an exception. There's a freeway in the area that's been in the
planning for 20 years. The land is cleared, on a satellite image you
can see exactly where it will be. In that case I think putting it in
as "proposed" is not unreasonable.

Basically, if you can see the effects already, it's mappable. This may
be prior to the start of construction.

Have a nice day,
-- 
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog at gmail.com> http://svana.org/kleptog/