On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 9:15 PM, Richard Colless <fire...@ar.com.au> wrote:
> You're right, Steve, there is no way to prove it. What we need to be sure > of is that our own actions are ethical, and in the spirit of OSM. I *do*use a > street directory, along with some online sources, to verify street > names, or to check spelling. I don't have any qualms about it, and I hope > with my explanation that others will feel comfortable also. > > Yes, I'm reaching the conclusion that there is a "spectrum of dodginess" ranging from blatant copying of large numbers of coordinates down to much more minor checks of spelling, use of other maps for directions etc. The further you get from the blatant end, the more people's opposition seems to be motivated by ideology, aesthetics, unstated reasons etc. That's ok. It has occurred to me that in some ways it would be useful to blatantly copy streets from other sources, and mark them "TODO" or something, with just start and end points. They wouldn't render in the main map, but might render in some specialist maps for OSM people. They would make it a lot easier to know which streets you needed to go and map. Then you'd delete the copied one, and only use the real data. I think it would be legitimate, but far too fraught to propose seriously. Steve
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au