[OSM-talk] RFC: what are empty nodes and how should we use them?

[Renaud MICHEL]

Le mardi 17 août 2010 à 10:28, Peter Wendorff a écrit :
> > Wrong because someone could try to build an object from them in the 
> > next step.
> 
> As I said, that would be no problem, as long as this "someone" does not 
> download my changes in between - he already has his already uploaded 
> nodes in his editor.

No, when they upload their ways, referring to the already uploaded nodes, 
they will get a conflict because the nodes they though still existed were 
deleted.

> > [...]
> >
> >  To me, the logical equivalent would be covering every unmapped place 
> >
> > in "fixme"s.)
> 
> Would that be wrong?
> For me that sounds completely acceptable: missing data in the map should 
> be fixed - it's in some cases not worse than wrong data.
> A white area in the map of course is sometimes obviously a todo hint, 
> but I don't see, why the fixme note would be wrong there.

It is wrong if you don't know if there is actually something to fix.
If you know there is some road somewhere in an empty region, you can add 
fixme's, you can even put the road name in the fixme if you know it.

But if you simply see an empty region and have never been there (nor have 
aerial images) then you have no idea if there is something missing there, or 
if it is really empty.

-- 
Renaud Michel