[OSM-talk] RFC: what are empty nodes and how should we use them?
Maarten Deen
mdeen at xs4all.nl
Mon Aug 16 07:48:22 BST 2010
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 08:19:42 +0200, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Jonas Stein wrote:
>> In the IRC channel i was told, that there are users who paint
>> empty nodes in the map to mark things like
>> "road is not mapped, but continues here"
>
> I do this occasionally, and I'm sure I haven't made this up but got
> the practice from someone/somewhere else - when a way is drawn and you
> know it goes on but haven't mapped it, you put three "dots", just as
> you do in written language:
>
> --------------- . . .
>
> I'm not religious about it but I think it is pretty elegant because
> it does not require language to explain it - or at least that's what I
> thought until I heard from several people that they "delete empty
> nodes on sight" without further thought.
It's the first that I heard of this strategy and I'm not sure if I
would recognize it. I certainly haven't in the past.
It does raise a question: why not just map a way over it and tag it
with some FIXME? If I map a new area and make photo's and see that there
is a road somewhere that I didn't go, I map the road as far as I can see
it and.
> I mean - an empty node somewhere in the middle of town which has sat
> there for ages, ok, but if you saw something like the above, where the
> three nodes clearly hint at a way continuation - would you really
> remove them? I'd think that a bit careless.
I would at least tag the nodes with a FIXME. Personally I do make a
point of looking at the history of a stray node, but that is far from
failsafe.
Regards,
Maarten
More information about the talk
mailing list