This is your opinion, which you are seeking to impose on everybody.
Somewhat selectively it would appear, as you are not going to burn your
fingers on highway=proposed. I guess you will be deleting the HS2
(proposed UK high speed rail line) route as well, right? If you would
like to, you will
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 23:18:17 -0400
Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
But what gives them the right to delete things that other people CAN
see and DO want to have in OSM?
Because mapping thoroughly destroyed objects that no longer exist (like
rail lines where even earthworks are levelled
Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
Therefore I will delete any object that no longer exists or never
existed (after communication with mapper or other method to
verify whatever I am mistaken, with exception of highway=
proposed).
OSM would be a better, and nicer, place if people went out and did
sent from a phone
Am 29.08.2015 um 12:42 schrieb Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net:
OSM would be a better, and nicer, place if people went out and did mapping,
rather than staying at home and doing deleting.
+1, deletionism and relevance discussions have seriously harmed Wikipedia
* Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com [2015-08-21 09:22 +0200]:
railway=dismantled means there is no railway currently but there are clear
traces / remains of a railway (because if there weren't we would not put it
in Osm).
Just for clarity:
railway=abandoned (per the wiki and my
Pieren writes:
There is a large consensus on that in the community. Why are you
insisting ? If you like, check the OHM project which is dedicated
for historical maps.
We've been through this before. You're just insisting on your view and
claiming that everyone agrees with you. There is no
For what it's worth, I'm in favour of tagging dismantled railways as
railway=dismantled
Even if it does pass through newly built buildings.
Polyglot
2015-08-25 9:52 GMT+02:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org:
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 6:09 PM, moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com
wrote:
On
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 6:09 PM, moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 22/08/2015, John Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
So, if you are looking for a route without steep grades, a former
railway is a natural choice.
Do people actually do this ?
Yes, I do.
It sounds like a
On Tue Aug 25 09:12:15 2015 GMT+0100, Jo wrote:
For what it's worth, I'm in favour of tagging dismantled railways as
railway=dismantled
+1
Even if it does pass through newly built buildings.
-1
I passionately believe dismantled railways should both be in openstreetmap and
be rendered,
On 23/08/2015, mick bare...@tpg.com.au wrote:
On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 00:09:43 +0100
moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com wrote:
Do people actually do this ? It sounds like a strawman argument to me.
I do a fair bit of walking and cycling, and when planing a trip I look
at the global topographic
On 22/08/2015, John Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
So, if you are looking for a route without steep grades, a former
railway is a natural choice.
Do people actually do this ? It sounds like a strawman argument to me.
I do a fair bit of walking and cycling, and when planing a trip I look
at
Not precisely flat, but with very shallow grades, by definition. Regular
railroad engines (as opposed to cog railway engines) can't climb steep
slopes. So, if you are looking for a route without steep grades, a former
railway is a natural choice.
--
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
On Sun, 23 Aug 2015 00:09:43 +0100
moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22/08/2015, John Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote:
So, if you are looking for a route without steep grades, a former
railway is a natural choice.
Do people actually do this ? It sounds like a strawman
On 21/08/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Am 20.08.2015 um 14:59 schrieb Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
where is the railway here ? were are the rails ?
there aren't any rails, but there is a railbed, this cutting wouldn't make
sense for a cycleway, would it? (inappropriate
sent from a phone
Am 20.08.2015 um 14:59 schrieb Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
where is the railway here ? were are the rails ?
there aren't any rails, but there is a railbed, this cutting wouldn't make
sense for a cycleway, would it? (inappropriate effort)
why should we keep
any mention
sent from a phone
Am 19.08.2015 um 20:06 schrieb Glenn Powers gl...@net127.com:
For the record, I deleted an abandoned railway that leads through a new
housing development, because it didn't make any sense to leave it there.
Satellite images clearly show ground gradings indicating an
On 20/08/2015, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
moltonel 3x Combo writes:
But it's equally annoying and tiring to repeatedly encounter the
ludicrous kind of railway=abandoned,
Then tag it as railway=dismantled. You won't find me defending
incorrect tagging of anything.
If
On 20/08/2015, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
moltonel 3x Combo writes:
The demolished: prefix only makes sense when there is something left
of the former feature, typically rubble (useful for example to alert
boattripers of the hazard). When there is nothing left in reality,
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Frederik Ramm writes:
The trouble is that I'm being
threatened with having my contributions deleted!
DELETED!
Why incentive do I have to correctly tag, when people are saying Go
ahead, I'm just going to delete it anyway
On 20/08/15 14:06, moltonel 3x Combo wrote:
On 19/08/2015, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
98% of the history that we are looking to manage properly is currently
existing in OSM. All that is needed is to add start dates to the bulk of
the existing data.
What do you do when a road
On 19/08/2015, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
98% of the history that we are looking to manage properly is currently
existing in OSM. All that is needed is to add start dates to the bulk of
the existing data.
What do you do when a road gets upgraded, widened, straightened,
renamed, or
On 20/08/2015, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
moltonel writes:
When they show up, we can have a discussion. In the meantime, I'm
here, and many other mappers map abandoned and dismantled railways,
and we would like to NOT HAVE YOU FRICK WITH OUR STUFF.
Please don't shout and curse, it
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 02:59:34PM +0200, Pieren wrote:
I got some examples from the net:
[1]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dunstable,_Dismantled_railway_and_National_Cycle_Network_Route_6_-_geograph.org.uk_-_146322.jpg
where is the railway here ? were are the rails ? why
On 08/16/2015 03:11 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Also I have the impression that, contrary to what you're saying, at
least some proponents of abandoned railway mapping find it totally ok to
map an abandoned railway that leads through a modern day housing
development.
For the record, I deleted an
Frederik Ramm writes:
Also I have the impression that, contrary to what you're saying, at
least some proponents of abandoned railway mapping find it totally ok to
map an abandoned railway that leads through a modern day housing
development.
Abandoned? No. Dismantled? Yes. Now, I must
moltonel writes:
The existence of ohm is a strong aknowlegement that osm is only for
the present. Russ, you're an expert in old railroads, but think of
all the other old things you could be an expert of. If all the
niche experts
When they show up, we can have a discussion. In the
On 19/08/15 01:36, moltonel 3x Combo wrote:
Be carefull not to mix up database history and real-world history.
Database history keeps track of the mapping process, as geometry gets
refined, details get added, and blunders get reverted. World history
tracks what the world was like at a specific
Glenn Powers writes:
For the record, I deleted an abandoned railway that leads through a new
housing development, because it didn't make any sense to leave it there.
Satellite images clearly show ground gradings indicating an abandoned
railway. IIRC, it was also featured in century-old
moltonel 3x Combo writes:
The demolished: prefix only makes sense when there is something left
of the former feature, typically rubble (useful for example to alert
boattripers of the hazard). When there is nothing left in reality,
there should be nothing left in OSM.
Question: should we
moltonel 3x Combo writes:
I do empathise with Russ being angered at his work being deleted
without discussion.
Not any happier if it gets deleted after discussion either. I brought
my data (I started mapping railways in 2004) to OSM because I thought
that the community was friendly to
moltonel 3x Combo writes:
To me the distinguishing criteria between disused and abandoned is
wether the rails are still present or not.
Indeed. disused means the rails are still there. Abandoned means that
the rails are gone. Dismantled (or some people use razed) is when a
section of the
2015-08-18 2:30 GMT+02:00 Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com:
Retag the middle bit demolished:bridge=yes would be a better solution?
Retains all the data. If the bridge were rebuilt then it could simply be
retagged back.
Features that are gone from world should be also removed from OSM. There
are
Absolutely agreed. I am trying to ignite a constructive debate here, not
to get a specific answer to a rhetorical question. I have been around
OSM long enough to know how it works.
On 2015-08-18 01:49, Warin wrote:
On 17/08/2015 11:54 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi,
On 08/17/2015 03:13 PM,
sent from a phone
Am 18.08.2015 um 04:46 schrieb Nicolás Alvarez nicolas.alva...@gmail.com:
They are easy to survey and verify: shops either have them in a sign visible
from outside, or in a sign inside near the point of sale
around here they don't have these signs but they have to be
On 2015-08-18 02:13, Warin wrote:
On 17/08/2015 11:13 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
...which IMHO is part of the bigger picture of data quality. Quality is not
the same as perfection. It is about agreeing things, complying with what has
been agreed, the ability to measure the compliance
On 18/08/2015, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Serge Wroclawski writes:
TIGER wasn't what I was referring to.
Please don't speak on my behalf.
Very well. Feel free to point to anything anywhere that people are
afraid to delete. I want to see 1) something that obviously doesn't
On 18/08/2015, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17/08/2015 10:48 PM, moltonel 3x Combo wrote:
On 17/08/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Am 17.08.2015 um 02:39 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
* A broken bridge with just a few meters left on both
On 18/08/2015, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
On 18/08/15 13:04, moltonel 3x Combo wrote:
Remember that deleted osm objects *are* kept in the osm history and
can even be undeleted (finding the old object id is currently a pain,
but I certainly hope that this'll become easyer someday).
Hi,
On 08/18/2015 03:21 PM, Richard wrote:
Especially as many railways come with more or less dense key:ele tagging
they are much more reliable to derive height profile information than any
other data we have.
Do I understand you correctly: We should map abandoned railways because
we lack a
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 03:27:14PM +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 08/18/2015 03:21 PM, Richard wrote:
Especially as many railways come with more or less dense key:ele tagging
they are much more reliable to derive height profile information than any
other data we have.
Do I
On 18/08/15 13:04, moltonel 3x Combo wrote:
Remember that deleted osm objects *are* kept in the osm history and
can even be undeleted (finding the old object id is currently a pain,
but I certainly hope that this'll become easyer someday). Deleting an
object is hardly different from editing it
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 12:07:05PM +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 08/11/2015 07:09 AM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Now, you might think Goddamnit, does Russell have to start again?
Yes, I have to start again. I was in north-western Pennsylvania last
weekend looking for the Corry Junction Rail
sent from a phone
Am 17.08.2015 um 02:39 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
* A broken bridge with just a few meters left on both riverbanks
I surely wouldn't have removed this one. Isn't this a significant feature to
many people?
cheers
Martin
sent from a phone
Am 17.08.2015 um 02:53 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
http://www.dieter-kloessing.de/Berlin/Berlin-Zehlendorf3.html#Anchor-Stammbahn-47857
That actually looks like disused rather than abandoned to me.
these are clearly abandoned, have been there (although
sent from a phone
Am 17.08.2015 um 08:28 schrieb Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
OSM IDs are too volatile, and IIRC there were objections to putting foreign
keys (like shop branch numbers) into OSM on the grounds that someone would
need to maintain that link.
Some people are adding
On 17/08/2015 4:28 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
If only all this energy were directed at helping OSM forwards. We
haven't had a lot of progress in the last few years (I am not talking
about mapping as such, but about the OSM framework itself).
There are still periodical discussions about how to
On 17/08/2015 10:48 PM, moltonel 3x Combo wrote:
On 17/08/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Am 17.08.2015 um 02:39 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
* A broken bridge with just a few meters left on both riverbanks
I surely wouldn't have removed this one.
On 17/08/2015 11:13 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
On 2015-08-17 13:37, Warin wrote:
On 17/08/2015 4:28 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
Will the free-tagging laissez-faire camp win, or will the
curated/managed tagging camp win?
I'm in the 'systematised free tagging' camp .. I want a structure
that has
Serge Wroclawski writes:
TIGER wasn't what I was referring to.
Please don't speak on my behalf.
Very well. Feel free to point to anything anywhere that people are
afraid to delete. I want to see 1) something that obviously doesn't
belong there, 2) which isn't TIGER and 3) evidence that
On 17/08/2015 11:54 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 08/17/2015 03:13 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
So if I think something is useful to me, and I am prepared to maintain
it to my own satisfaction, I can feel free add it
I'd think it should be documented in the wiki .. so others can 'see' what it is
2015-08-17 6:04 GMT-03:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com:
sent from a phone
Am 17.08.2015 um 08:28 schrieb Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
OSM IDs are too volatile, and IIRC there were objections to putting
foreign keys (like shop branch numbers) into OSM on the grounds
On 17/08/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Am 17.08.2015 um 02:39 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo molto...@gmail.com:
* A broken bridge with just a few meters left on both riverbanks
I surely wouldn't have removed this one. Isn't this a significant feature to
many people?
In
On 2015-08-17 13:37, Warin wrote:
On 17/08/2015 4:28 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
If only all this energy were directed at helping OSM forwards. We haven't
had a lot of progress in the last few years (I am not talking about mapping
as such, but about the OSM framework itself).
There
Hi,
On 08/17/2015 03:13 PM, Colin Smale wrote:
So if I think something is useful to me, and I am prepared to maintain
it to my own satisfaction, I can feel free add it
... to a file on your local computer where it will continue to please
you for years to come ;)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik
Russ,
TIGER wasn't what I was referring to.
Please don't speak on my behalf.
- Serge
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Colin,
it is a very common fallacy in OSM to claim that out of some sense of
fairness, the fact that there is already some data in OSM that
violates some rules (e.g. boundaries being in OSM even though hardly
verifiable on the ground) is an automatic enabler of any and all other
content
Frederik Ramm wrote:
What everybody can see is a clearing or change in the surface
of something. That's fine to map.
Inferring from that that there must have been a railway there is a
step too far. We are mappers, not trappers.
Ok, let's try an experiment.
Go to
sent from a phone
Am 16.08.2015 um 22:11 schrieb Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org:
What everybody can see is a clearing or change in the surface of
something. That's fine to map.
Inferring from that that there must have been a railway there is a step
too far. We are mappers, not
On 16/08/2015, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Frederik Ramm wrote:
What everybody can see is a clearing or change in the surface
of something. That's fine to map.
Inferring from that that there must have been a railway there is a
step too far. We are mappers, not trappers.
On 16/08/2015, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
it really depends, this is an example for an abandoned railway where reading
the traces is quite easy, and which is tagged (IMHO correctly) as abandoned
railway in osm:
Warin writes:
On 16/08/2015 1:35 AM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Seriously? THIS is your line of reasoning? There's a simple way to
empower them: If it's got TIGER tags and you don't see it, delete it.
TIGER tags?
Don't they only occur in one area of the world? Rather a small view
of
2015-08-16 11:03 GMT+02:00 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org:
Data that is not verifiable on the ground is the absolute *exception* in
OSM, and needs a very strong reason for being there.
this thread as far as I have understood is not about things that have
disappeared without any traces but
Richard Fairhurst writes:
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Inferring from that that there must have been a railway there is a
step too far. We are mappers, not trappers.
Tell me again you can't infer there must have been a railway there. I dare
you. I double dare you.
Nobody is asking
On 15/08/2015 10:08 PM, Lester Caine wrote:
On 15/08/15 12:55, Colin Smale wrote:
Good question. We assume they were not entered from sources without a
suitable licence. Should we delete them? I certainly don't need to know
where the gas pipelines are.
But someone buying a house close by may
On 15 August 2015 16:29:56 GMT+01:00, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
Are we even talking about the same thing? Let's assume that you made a
s mple t po.
Don't those last two words look a little weird with missing bits?
Shouldn't those letters be there? Shouldn't the dismantled bits of a
On 16/08/2015 1:29 AM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Warin writes:
On 15/08/2015 3:46 PM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Railway=dismantled. Doesn't get rendered except where it should be,
do you still want railway=disused to remain?
Are we even talking about the same thing? Let's assume that you made a
On 16/08/2015 1:35 AM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Serge Wroclawski writes:
Our project's policy thusfar has been in contrast to other projects in that
each and every one of us is empowered to make changes to anything we see.
You're starting to understand! You should make changes to things you
On 15/08/2015 7:19 PM, Volker Schmidt wrote:
I would like to argue for a general
do-not-remove-if-you-do-not-have-the-original-mapper's-ok-beforehand
policy for these and similar cases.
I have myself mapped a couple of abandoned railways where the remains
were often no longer recognizable
So who decides what is good data and what is bad data?
And visibility on the ground needs nuancing. Are we to remove
underground pipelines/power lines? Or boundaries? Visible and/or
verifiable might be better. A rule that needs loads of exceptions, is
not a well formed rule.
An abandoned
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
So who decides what is good data and what is bad data?
The community as a whole decides what is good and bad data. That starts
with the local community and moves up to the OSM community as a whole in
terms of whether or
I would like to argue for a general
do-not-remove-if-you-do-not-have-the-original-mapper's-ok-beforehand policy
for these and similar cases.
I have myself mapped a couple of abandoned railways where the remains were
often no longer recognizable individually as traces of a former railway,
but as a
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 5:19 AM, Volker Schmidt vosc...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to argue for a general
do-not-remove-if-you-do-not-have-the-original-mapper's-ok-beforehand policy
for these and similar cases.
Then you are (whether or not you intend it) arguing in favor of
dis-empowering
On 15/08/2015 3:46 PM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Mateusz Konieczny writes:
In another case where railway tracks that were removed, embankment
demolished and somebody build there houses. In that case railway
track should not be mapped in OSM because this feature is gone.
Railway=dismantled.
On 2015-08-15 13:15, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote:
So who decides what is good data and what is bad data?
The community as a whole decides what is good and bad data. That starts with
the local community and moves up
I meant it a bit rhetorically... Let's live and let live, instead of
deleting stuff that *we* don't happen to be interested in. Which brings
us back to Russ's original point.
On 2015-08-15 14:08, Lester Caine wrote:
On 15/08/15 12:55, Colin Smale wrote:
Good question. We assume they
On 15/08/15 12:55, Colin Smale wrote:
Good question. We assume they were not entered from sources without a
suitable licence. Should we delete them? I certainly don't need to know
where the gas pipelines are.
But someone buying a house close by may be interested? A number of
pipelines have
sent from a phone
Am 15.08.2015 um 12:31 schrieb Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com:
1. Visible on the ground but difficult to detect (ie require specialized
knowledge)
or
2. No longer visible at all.
no, the second case would be mistagged with railway=abandoned in most of the
On 15/08/15 12:15, Serge Wroclawski wrote:
So who decides what is good data and what is bad data?
The community as a whole decides what is good and bad data. That starts
with the local community and moves up to the OSM community as a whole in
terms of whether or not data belongs in OSM
sent from a phone
Am 15.08.2015 um 12:31 schrieb Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com:
The problem that we have in some parts of the world is a lack of data, but in
other parts, we have an abundance of bad imports, and a general timidness
around the removal of data that we can't find the
sent from a phone
Am 15.08.2015 um 13:55 schrieb Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl:
What about roman roads which are no longer visible without remote sensing or
ground penetrating radar? Are we suggesting they also have no place in OSM?
actually I am living in an area with a lot of
Warin writes:
On 15/08/2015 3:46 PM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Railway=dismantled. Doesn't get rendered except where it should be,
do you still want railway=disused to remain?
Are we even talking about the same thing? Let's assume that you made a
s mple t po.
Don't those last two words look a
Serge Wroclawski writes:
Our project's policy thusfar has been in contrast to other projects in that
each and every one of us is empowered to make changes to anything we see.
You're starting to understand! You should make changes to things you
see. Things you don't see require a higher
On 15/08/15 16:29, Russ Nelson wrote:
Now, I'm sure somebody will, at some point say, Russell, just go off
to OpenHistoricalMap and put your data there. That's fine, except for
those pesky implementation details where THEY ARE IN TWO DISPARATE
DATABASES, UNCONNECTED. How, exactly, do you make
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 02:23:29 -0400
Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
What if I was to add the aqueduct which goes past Aqueduct Race Track
on Long Island, NY? It is without question there (the name Aqueduct
should be a pretty good hint), yet it cannot be seen anywhere. Why not
map that?
Maarten Deen writes:
On 2015-08-14 07:44, Russ Nelson wrote:
Maarten Deen writes:
I beg your pardon? I read this as nothing can be deleted, since
you
say that deleting something you don't see (which usually means it's
not
there) is reason for a ban.
No, nobody is
On 2015-08-14 08:23, Russ Nelson wrote:
Maarten Deen writes:
On 2015-08-14 07:44, Russ Nelson wrote:
Maarten Deen writes:
I beg your pardon? I read this as nothing can be deleted,
since
you
say that deleting something you don't see (which usually means
it's
not
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 09:33:11 +1000
Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13/08/2015 11:24 PM, Ruben Maes wrote:
On Thursday 13 August 2015 15:10:14 Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 21:54:39 +1000
Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote:
For example a demolished building .. may
Serge Wroclawski writes:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com wrote:
It's really just a small handful of people who think it's okay not
just to delete things, but to counsel other people to delete
things. I didn't see it, so I deleted it is a reason for a
Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com writes:
sent from a phone
Am 14.08.2015 um 10:48 schrieb Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com:
These discussions are nuanced. Are there going to be things one
person can identify that another can't- yes. But at the same time, I
still think that as
On 14/08/15 14:16, Ian Sergeant wrote:
Wow. Every time I edit, I'm splitting ways to add relations, speed
limit changes, lane counts, etc. If the original way happens to still
existing when I've finished it's more good luck than good management.
And it's just as likely to be the stub of the
Russ,
Instead of replying to every individual point, I'm going to address your
email as a whole, which is around the idea that deletion is different from
addition.
These discussions are nuanced. Are there going to be things one person can
identify that another can't- yes. But at the same time, I
On 15 August 2015 at 00:12, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
As I have said before 'Delete' is something that should never happen on
what has at some time been correct information. 'Archive' is the correct
term and making that data available as required ... Delete is only
appropriate
On 14/08/15 22:03, Ian Sergeant wrote:
On 15 August 2015 at 00:12, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk
mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
As I have said before 'Delete' is something that should never happen on
what has at some time been correct information. 'Archive' is the correct
On 14/08/15 23:14, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 22:51:13 +0100
Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
But the
one thing that the current model has got the capability of handling is
start and stop dates for any facet of an object from the name of a
shop to the evolution of
On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 22:51:13 +0100
Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote:
But the
one thing that the current model has got the capability of handling is
start and stop dates for any facet of an object from the name of a
shop to the evolution of the road and rail system over time. That the
On 14/08/2015 10:10 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
Am 14.08.2015 um 05:09 schrieb Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com:
We allow original research and expert testimony.
So, is OSM to contain only the obvious that everyone can see? Or
should it contain everything that can be seen?
Mateusz Konieczny writes:
In another case where railway tracks that were removed, embankment
demolished and somebody build there houses. In that case railway
track should not be mapped in OSM because this feature is gone.
Railway=dismantled. Doesn't get rendered except where it should be,
sent from a phone
Am 14.08.2015 um 05:09 schrieb Russ Nelson nel...@crynwr.com:
We allow original research and expert testimony.
So, is OSM to contain only the obvious that everyone can see? Or
should it contain everything that can be seen?
well spoken, I see this like you and would
sent from a phone
Am 14.08.2015 um 10:48 schrieb Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com:
These discussions are nuanced. Are there going to be things one person can
identify that another can't- yes. But at the same time, I still think that as
a project, we've collectively made a decision
I appreciate that there are strong feelings about this topic, but we could
certainly use more constructive language and have a civilized conversation.
You're one of the people that needs to shut the hell up is not a great
way to win hearts and minds and especially not a great representation of
our
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
