[OSM-talk] Temporary Items, overlays, changes

Dave Stubbs osm.list at randomjunk.co.uk
Thu Jan 8 17:06:01 GMT 2009

2009/1/8 David Lynch <djlynch at gmail.com>:
> I think that "temporary" and "historical" prefixes are the best answer
> to this, possibly with a relation for roads that are different due to
> the same event, project, etc.

I'd keep historical out entirely. I see the point of
temporary/intermittent data, and construction type planning data, but
I think maybe historical geometries are a little beyond the scope of
OSM as it is.
Putting in battlefields or other historical notes relating to a
location seem fine, but I'm imagining the scenario where someone is
trying to trace a 1575 map of London into the DB... followed by a 1675
map... I don't think we really want to encourage that without a
database and project which has actually been designed to cope.

Don't forget that deleting the data doesn't actually put it beyond
reach -- it's still there in the OSM history if someone wants to come
and retrieve it -- it's obviously not a good way of storing historical
data because it doesn't tell us why it was deleted (deleted in
reality, or just in our DB), but it does mean we can be relatively
sensible about keeping the main view up to date with things that
aren't there any more.


More information about the talk mailing list