On Thu, 29 May 2014 11:27:42 +0100 Dan S expressed very well: > 2014-05-29 11:12 GMT+01:00 malenki <[email protected]>: > > On Thu, 29 May 2014 05:42:27 -0400 > > Serge Wroclawski wrote: > > So let's keep them eh? But let's not jump too quickly to using words > like "vandalism" in this context which is still a lovely polite one.
Seems there are a lot of people jumping to it; just recently I saw a case where a very young well meaning mapper (20 edits) was named this way. > >> > water=lake;pond 57045 > >> > >> We don't go around removing thousands of tags because there is a > >> new tagging scheme. > > > > You miss the point. > > Let's be a bit clearer: > [verbose ecplanation] You got the point. I am sorry I assumed it would be so clear that there wasn't need to write a novel about it. :) > > If you mean the "original" editors: > > WorstFixer who invented waterway=lake;pond (looking at the > > numbers¹) is no longer active. > > No I think he means removed automatically by JOSM etc: whenever a > person uses JOSM to edit a lake it could silently drop unwanted tags, That's possible, but it does not solve the problem of the useless tag (who would go around and enhance 57k imported objects "by hand) but adds another: the occurrence of this tag could also mean that someone merged objects carelessly. Dropping this tag silently would make it less likely to discover this error. Regards Thomas _______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
