Hi, On 10.04.2014 18:08, André Pirard wrote: > In other words, 40% tags (on ways) can't be wrong. But the problem is > that 99.+% of these correct tags are mistakes and shouldn't even exist > because they do not represent "ways ending near another way", which are > the targets of noexit=yes, but normal dead ends needing no other tagging.
I don't see a problem in tagging a normal dead-end with "noexit=yes". It doesn't hurt, and adds information (namely that this isn't just a bit where I had no time to continue tracing, but a proper "end"). I don't do it myself but I'll certainly not make an effort to flag this as "error" and get my knickers in a twist about it. > What, in tagging a way, indicates on which end of it is the dead end? > (I asked that already). The question does not make sense. Of course the end that is not connected to another highway is the dead-end. If the way should not be connected to anything on either side it will already be flagged as a connectivity error. > What does happen when the way is split or unsplit? Logically, if you merge a dead-end with a non-dead-end, the result will still be a dead-end. If you split a dead-end then one part won't be a dead-end and the other will - however, having a way tagged noexit=yes which has no dangling ends doesn't seem to be a drastic error to me. > In fact, is it "the way" or is it "the highway"? Just a segment or more > and up to where? I think you should take a deep breath and calm down. The bit that is "typical OSM" about this is that people can't cope with a bit of fuzziness and then start endless discussions, and in the end claim that OSM is doomed, lacks quality, will never work, is ruled by idiots, whatever. > I know who is right: our government who say that OSM is not > [necessarily, to remain civil] up to the quality they expect for data. I > fear that this does not favor obtaining data from them. Well who knows if we even want your government's data. Maybe it lacks the qualities we are looking for. > I was enthusiastic, but I now believe less and less in OSM. Maybe you misunderstood OSM and you are slowly learning what it is, and what it is not. > Please let us ask Osmose to mark as an error any nooexit=yes that is > either not on a node or not close to another way. We could report that > action to that government and others as an example that we at least try > to put our data right. I don't think that we have to prove to any government that we are "trying to put right" something that is hardly a problem. In fact, spending brainpower and time on such a trivial issue would be quite a misallocation of resources. > Now what about some more fun? Flood tagging noexit=no in the middle of > every street? That wouldn't make 40% but 100% and require a wiki update > by those able to understand contributors, wouldn't it? ;-) Vandalise OSM to prove a point and we'll kick you out. Just so that governments around the world can see that we're taking that seriously. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [email protected] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
