[OSM-talk] Abandoned Rails

[Mateusz Konieczny]

On Wed, 02 Sep 2015 11:57:19 +0200
Colin Smale <colin.smale at xs4all.nl> wrote:

> Are you suggesting that parcel boundaries have no place in OSM, or
> that only verifiable sources should be used? Suppose there was a
> suitably licensed source of such boundaries, with authoritative
> provenance. Would you be against this being in OSM on principle? Or
> is it only your supposition that such information cannot be
> sufficiently verifiable which gives rise to your concern? 
> 
> Anyway, fences, signs etc are not reliable indicators of parcel
> boundaries (where there are land registries), unless the boundary is
> legally described with reference to these physical artefacts. 

> only verifiable sources should be used?

Yes. And objects unverifiable on the ground should be added only after
really careful consideration.

> Are you suggesting that parcel boundaries have no place in OSM

I think that this data is too hard to maintain, unlikely to be useful
and importing it would result in editing problems due to adding massive
amount of objects unverifiable on the ground.

It would be basically mirroring official database what is pointless.