Richard Fairhurst writes:
> Minh Nguyen wrote:
>> Following some discussion about this changeset in OSMUS
>> Slack [2], I started a discussion on the wiki about preferring
>> more stable population figures over supposition about
>> temporary circumstances. [3]
>
> It's roughly analogous to a situation we had a few months ago with road
> closures due to Hurricane Florence:
>
> https://twitter.com/richardf/status/1040931194999898114
>
> I think the answer is that temporary situations need temporary (i.e.
> lifecycle-bounded) tagging. Tagging temporary situations with unbounded tags
> is ok for those browsing osm.org or another online slippy map with minutely
> updates, but not for anyone using offline maps, sites with less frequent
> updates, and so on.
That is a real issue. The offline/online distinction is messsy, as you
say, because of the various update times. I use offline mpas, but tend
to update every few days (osmand live).
But I see population as fundamentally different; the population doesn't
change during an evacuation, and we don't have a tag for "how many
people are currently within this boundary", which is the value that does
change (and changes dailly due to commmuting, etc.). If someone were
studying things like this and somehow had a graph of the number of
humans within some administrative boundary by hour, they would certainly
not label the y axis "population".
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
