On Mon 2018-10-29 10:16:31, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 10/28/18 18:46, Pieter Vander Vennet wrote: > > By having the integrationprocess in place, we can make sure that the > > data is properly integrated, properly attributed and backreferenced for > > future updates. > > I am always skeptical of imports trying to uphold links to an external > database, and would recommend *not* keeping any IDs from the source > object in OSM. > > Keeping a link to the source signals to the mapper "don't touch this, > it's official data" or "your edits can be overwritten by a future import".
FUD :-(.
> More often than not, importers keep an external ID because they think
> "it might be useful later". If you want to keep an ID then you ought
> to
It is useful later.
> determine *now* if and how you want to use that, and give guidance to
> mappers: If you split a building that has such an ID what should you do
> - delete the ID from both, keep on both, or...? If you delete a building
> that has such an ID, how will you ensure it isn't brought in again
> through a later "update import"? Etc.
Whatever the mapper does, it is better than not having the ID in the
first place.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
