[OSM-talk] Too subjective & problematic Re: no-go-areas
Jóhannes Birgir Jensson
joi at betra.is
Sun Jan 12 21:00:19 UTC 2020
So you suggest that we help routers to blacklist these areas, which means living there will become even worse as various services depending on our data stop delivering there?
These no-go areas are very much based on estimates. Personally if we are marking hazards then my country can pretty much be marked as a hazard - for example the curent weather in January is strong winds and snow, meaning if you are outside in normal daily clothes you are not surviving more than a few hours.
This idea is for a dataset that should be solved on a local level with apps using OSM data and their own hazard estimations. This does not belong on OSM.
12. janúar 2020 kl. 19:35, skrifaði "Snusmumriken" <snusmumriken.mapper at runbox.com>:
> On Sun, 2020-01-12 at 18:46 +0100, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>> I understand that it would politically sensitive, but from a data-
>> point of view it doesn't really differ from postcode areas (under
>> assumption that there's an authority that designates some areas as
>> high-risk areas)
>> There is a single authority assigning
>> postal codes.
>> With high-risk areas you may have different
>> organizations with competing opinions.
>> Also, in general people are not disputing postal codes.
>> In case of officially designed dangerous zones
>> situation is going to be different.
> Well, wasn't that the assumption I put forward in my previous e-mail?
> In Sweden, Swedish police lists 60 areas as what they call Vulnerable
> areas, subdivided into three groups based upon severity. Here's a
> wikipage about it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulnerable_area
> And here's an official report by the Swedish police (in Swedish)
> In everyday speech these are often called no-go zones
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
More information about the talk