On 03/04/2014 22:58, Richard Z. wrote:
On Thu, Apr 03, 2014 at 04:27:57PM -0500, John F. Eldredge wrote:
That is my main objection as well. This proposal is to deliberately reduce the
accuracy of the data in the name of saving a few seconds of mapping time.
nonsense. This proposal is here to improve the accuracy. You do not have to use
when you have precise data about bridge position and size. On the other hand if
your data is of the average precision (i.e. 5 meter GPS error) and you try to
enter a 3m bridge into the database you are entering junk data. This is the
situation when less data is better because it means less junk data in effect.
No.
If you have a GPS/GPX trace you must have been there & seen it. So don't
rely on your hardware, use your eyes!
A bridge with two nodes & way will always be more accurate (note: not
necessarily completely accurate) than a node. We're mapping physical
objects from the real world as accurately as we can.
David F.
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
