[OSM-talk] Improving ref=* documentation

Brian M. Sperlongano zelonewolf at gmail.com
Wed Aug 4 21:34:25 UTC 2021


If the sign on the ground doesn't match the government's database, then the
obvious answer is that the government database is wrong.  I don't see why
we would replicate demonstrably wrong data into OSM.

On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 5:32 PM Colin Smale <colin.smale at xs4all.nl> wrote:

> > On 08/04/2021 11:07 PM Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think an important addition is that OSM never makes up ref values.
> > They must already exist, and must be assigned by someone else, and this
> > assignment must be verifiable.
> >
> > If I tell someone that I have hit my head against lamp post #12345 in
> > Paris then they must be able to find out without recourse to OSM where
> > that lamp post is. (Otherwise I might as well say I hit my head against
> > node #123456789!)
>
> Hi Frederik,
>
> Over the last couple of days there has been some discussion on talk-gb
> about ref's on highways where the signs on the ground don't align with the
> official database of the highways authority. Can I take your comment to
> mean that, in your opinion, we should be following the official truth from
> the highways authority's registers in preference to the on-the-ground
> (historical) evidence?
>
> I have CC'd talk-gb so they can follow this discussion
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20210804/9a4c6c60/attachment.htm>


More information about the talk mailing list