Be my guest: intermittent=yes ephemeral=yes building=no permanent=no movable=yes stationary=no caravan=yes mount=trailer support=wheels foundation=no
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_restaurant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houseboat On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 7:30 PM Fernando Trebien <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 7:58 PM Joseph Eisenberg > <[email protected]> wrote: > > 2) "Don't map insignificant, perishable and mobile object" > > > > This is certainly true, but it duplicates advice in the previous > > section, so I've removed it. > > I think the existing advice was better indeed, so +1 for removing this. > > > 1) "Check the history of important objects" > > > > "Before making significant changes to important objects (in particular > > settlements, administrative boundaries, major buildings, tourist > > attractions,long route relations etc), check their history. Who did > > this and why? Was this an experienced contributor or a newbie? > > Previous editors may have valuable insights to offer on why things are > > currently tagged the way they are." > > > > I don't find this information helpful for new mappers. > > > > What is the "history" in this context? I don't think it would be clear > > to new mappers - it seems to suggest changeset comments > > > > What is an "important object?" > > I think I see what concerns that mapper as important. I've seen new > mappers deleting place nodes by accident and reinserting them, > creating objects that are not linked to the edit history of the former > objects. Of course, I've also seen this with less salient features > too. > > While OSM does not have the concept of notability, some kinds of > mistakes prompt the community more readily than others. For example, > accidentally removing part of a motorway is likely to be discovered > and fixed very fast (also making some people a little annoyed), while > accidentally removing part of a residential road may take years to be > noticed and fixed, depending on the level of OSM contributions (very > high in Germany, low where I am in Brazil). Errors on administrative > boundaries often show up while converting the data for offline usage, > which some apps do daily, but with JOSM and iD today this is not easy > to do unintentionally. Deleting a tourist attraction also prompts a > quick reaction, as the attraction is searched way more often than, > say, the median household building. > > I've often been told to explain certain kinds of changes in changeset > comments. The only way mappers can become aware of such comments is by > reading the history. Thus, reading the history is good practice, in > fact for all objects, but it adds a lot of extra work, mostly because > our current tools cannot display the history of every small object > (changes to geometry, tags, and changeset comments) in a way that is > easy/quick to read. > > I've often recommended using note=* and source:*=* tags for the more > important justifications as they are more visible to mappers, but a > careless mapper may make changes ignoring those as well, as they are > not very visible in all editors. The wiki prescriptively discourages > the use of source:*=* since 2016, but the OSM Tag History service > tells me that usage of source:*=* tags continues to increase > worldwide, so I'm note sure it can really be described as a > "historical" practice. > > -- > Fernando Trebien > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
