Hans De Kryger writes: > On Apr 2, 2015 7:08 AM, "EthnicFood IsGreat" <ethnicfoodisgr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > It's apparent to me that consensus will never be reached on whether or > not abandoned railroads belong in OSM (at least the way it is currently > configured), given the strong feelings on both sides of the issue. That's > why I think moving them to OHM is a good compromise. I don't like it, but > I would rather do that than see this data lost forever. At least in OHM, > the data still lives, and can always be moved back to OSM later if a > solution to the problem of historic features can be found. > > +1
Okay, but Hans, what Mark wrote is incoherent. The people who want to delete the dismantled portions of abandoned railroads from OSM want to delete them. Those of us who want the context of the dismantled portions to stay next to the merely abandoned or disused portions, do NOT want to delete them. This is a binary choice: stay or go. There is no compromise. Framing the choice to delete them as a compromise is simply a falsehood. With your +1, you are NOT COMPROMISING, you are saying that true things in OSM should be deleted. Let's just be clear on that: true things in OSM, which can often be verified in the field, are being deleted, people are supporting that, and it's NOT A COMPROMISE. -- --my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us