[OSM-talk] Bing maps is misplaced

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

For *that* particular imagery, yes.

My point is that blindly saying that you shouldn't trace from imagery
if you haven't visited the place is not a hard rule. There are a lot
of circumstances when tracing is actually OK.


On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 3:19 AM, John F. Eldredge <john at jfeldredge.com> wrote:
> So, you are saying that you feel OpenStreetMap should reflect the status of the road when the aerial photo was made, rather than the current status?
>
> -------Original Email-------
> Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] Bing maps is misplaced
> From  :mailto:seav80 at gmail.com
> Date  :Sun Dec 19 10:17:51 America/Chicago 2010
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 8:04 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2010/12/15 Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com>:
>>> I'm sorry, but no. This is not common practice, nor is it desirable.
>>> Could we please not give advice which only reflects personal
>>> preferences?
>>>
>>> Fwiw, highway=road is for when you know *nothing* about a road. Can
>>> you tell me, hand on heart, that you would not tag this road:
>>>
>>> http://www.nearmap.com/?ll=-38.107325,145.15275&z=20&t=k&nmd=20101020
>>>
>>> as highway=residential, maxspeed=50, surface=paved, lanes=2?
>>
>>
>> If I knew the road I would surely do it. For the _point_ you linked
>> to, it seems correct (the maxspeed at least for one direction), but I
>> still would have to guess, that this maxspeed is valid for the other
>> direction as well (probably yes, but you cannot be sure) and that it
>> is valid for the whole road.
>
> If I was a tourist and I went to that particular spot and saw that
> "50" on the ground, I still wouldn't know if the speed limit is just
> for one direction or both and if it applies to the whole road. So even
> if I were on the ground, my information would not be much better than
> if I traced from that particular aerial imagery.
>
>> Don't know if it is a residential street either (could be unclassified
>> or tertiary). Of course you don't know for other restrictions (e.g.
>> weight, but also access=destination, ...). You can be quite sure for
>> the information you provided above, but still you don't know if some
>> important information (like access=destination) that you surely would
>> insert if you had visited the place, is missing.
>
> OSM's a wiki, so other people can add those details. There's no need
> to have everything topnotch on the first edit. Otherwise we'd have a
> pretty blank map.
>
>> This discussion is simply about the quality level: are you satisfied
>> with probable information derived from an aerial photo depicting the
>> situation some years ago, or do you want to insert only information
>> you verified on the ground and you can guarantee for?
>
> For aerial imagery that is of a high resolution and recency as
> Nearmap's, I would rather trust an Australian to trace and add data
> from that imagery even if he/she has not been to the place than if I
> were to actually visit that place and add details from on the ground.
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> --
> John F. Eldredge -- john at jfeldredge.com
> "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
http://vaes9.codedgraphic.com