[OSM-talk] Ground truth for non-physical objects

Tomas Straupis tomasstraupis at gmail.com
Wed Dec 12 13:05:06 UTC 2018

Discussions about mapping invented addresses shows exactly what I
wanted to say: we get drowned in endless pointless
counter-counter-examples of counter-examples. Rules would have to be
invented for addresses separately, and then separately for each
country or even more detailed. We once again get to the same old
example of reflections/shadows in the end of the cave.

Vilnius is not a large city, with 0,5M population it has only ~60K
addresses. Still EACH week ~50-100 addresses change (changes,
additions, deletions). I do not imagine how would it be possible to
capture all that "on the ground" without an army of mappers devoted
specifically to this very boring and uninteresting but useful class -

Correct me if I'm wrong, but regions (larger than 1 square km) with
best (accurate and up to date) address coverage are the ones which use
official address registries.

P.S. I agree that when there is no open official source, physical
observation is the only thing we have.


More information about the talk mailing list