[OSM-talk] Bing coverage relations, in particular 1298962

[Richard Fairhurst]

Someoneelse wrote:
> Regardless of the "perhaps the map shouldn't render unknown things 
> just because of name=blah" issue, I'd argue that metadata such as 
> this really doesn't belong in OSM.

Agreed.

OSM is not the world's sole repository of co-ordinate data, and nor should
it be. This would be much better stored in an externally hosted .osm file or
shapefile, which can be loaded into the editor/tool of your choice, than in
the main database.

cheers
Richard



--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Bing-coverage-relations-in-particular-1298962-tp5669039p5669972.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.