Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists <ajrli...@...> writes: >But what is the point of just doing building=yes. Does that really add to >OSM? Surely tracing buildings (with aids or not) would be better associated >with address data inclusion rather than just making a pretty map?
You might consider it analogous to streets: at first they were mostly traced from aerial photos, and then mappers visited on the ground to fill in names (and other things as a side effect). This is certainly what I've been doing for the past couple of years. So yes, it would be great to trace the buildings from the OS maps (which would be just as accurate as tracing them from low-res aerial photos) and get them into OSM, even if the address is missing. If the NoNames map then highlighted buildings missing address info, that would motivate people to get out and add the addresses. (FWIW, I think just building shapes without any addresses are still useful, especially on council estates and other areas that lack clearly defined streets.) -- Ed Avis <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
