[OSM-talk] Defining critical mass...

[James Livingston]

On 14/07/2010, at 9:52 PM, John Smith wrote:
> On 14 July 2010 20:59, Richard Weait <richard at weait.com> wrote:
>> What do you suggest would be acceptable / unacceptable?
> 
> I would consider things to fail if more than 5-10% of data disappears
> in any region. At the very least it would be demoralising for anyone
> that spent even a few hours working to make OSM data better.

Every keep talking about 5% of the data disappearing, but being kept as-is and being remove aren't the only two possibilities.

Being removed is only necessary is the person who first created it refuses. If the object has say 6 version and mapper 4 refuses, it can be reverted to version 3. If mapper 5 says yes and just added the street name, you should in theory be allowed to re-add that to the version 3 data.


How all that will work in practice, I don't know. However part of it will still need to be dealt with, if nodes get removed but a way they are in doesn't, or things that are part of a relation.