On 27 September 2010 17:41, Dave F. <[email protected]> wrote: > On 27/09/2010 17:16, Tom Chance wrote: > > On 27 September 2010 16:34, Dave F. <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hmm... Mapping from Yahoo without ground knowledge is legitimate. >> Tagging the source as Yahoo implies that it maybe out of date & another, >> more accurate survey, should be carried out in the future but that shouldn't >> hinder adding the data. >> >> > I don't think the tag as used implies that, > > > All the traceable images imply a relative accuracy based when they were > issued. >
Yes, but how many people - upon completing a ground survey and editing somebody else's objects that have already been added with a "source" tag - promptly remove or amend that tag? How many people trace features following a survey and add the tag to bits they traced from imagery, having previously confirmed that it existed on the ground? It's a handy little tag, but not exactly reliable. I thought someone had created a hierarchical list in the wiki, but I can't > find it. > > How many contributors pore over difficult-to-find wiki pages? ;-) Regards, Tom -- http://tom.acrewoods.net http://twitter.com/tom_chance
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
