[OSM-talk] Fwd: Re: [Imports] amenity=bicycle_repair_station :::: only 18 so far

[SomeoneElse]

On 26/01/2015 19:55, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Chris Hill <osm at raggedred.net 
> <mailto:osm at raggedred.net>> wrote:
>
>     Again, that doesn't justify adding data you know are poor quality.
>     Please don't do that.
>
>
> The data in question is collected via GPS:  it's of similar quality to 
> other POI's collected via GPS.

No, not unless by "GPS" you mean "a quick location, possibly based on 
cell site rather than GPS, before the phone had got an accurate lock" 
(based on the locations that I could see where the correct location 
should have been - something that could of course have been done at 
import time, but wasn't.

> Every one I sought out to verify was readily findable.
> I think the quality is quite good, and perfectly adequate for a 
> cyclist to locate the stations in a time of need.
>
Well, the name on most of the UK ones is something like "So-and-so 
hospital", so given that those are well signposted, a cyclist could 
always go to the hospital reception and ask.  However, adding a node to 
OSM does rather suggest that you know where that node is somewhat better 
than that.

Cheers,

Andy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20150126/eb77bbeb/attachment.html>