Steve Bennett wrote "Or maybe the difference between people who think all "navigation" takes place on four wheels and the rest of us."
It's interesting that you choose to use the "I presume to speak for lots of other people and imply that there are way more of us than there are or you" approach. If you were to use a statistical approach to the issue, I firmly believe that you would find that a significant majority of people that need/use/pay-for accurate mapping, are in an area unfamilar to them and are either on foot or more likely on 4-wheels. In either case they will need street names, that need to be collected locally, and if on 4-wheels, then turn restrictions are vital for safety. Another point is that walkers and cyclists can easily and safely pull over and stop to consult the map and make sense of it compared to what they see around them. Motorists usually don't have this advantage and therefore it is critical that their maps must be completly accurate and up-to-date. I also think that cycle paths must be surveyed rather than traced, since it is vital to note any local issue that may catch a fast moving cyclist unawares. Fortunately, I believe Canberra has been expertly mapped is this regard. Therefore my stance is that any map that has roads without the turn restrictions or correct names (as shown on the street sign) should be considered (at best) just as good as google,teleatlas navteq sensis etc,etc,etc..... (and that, IMNSHO,is not not very good at all. </dismount SB>
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au