Peter Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > What I don't see is any way to indicate that the information added could > benefit from a ground-survey. NaPTAN imports include the tag > NaPTAN:verified=no. Should we not have something similar for data > taken straight from OS Open data, regardless of whether it is traced or > imported by code? Should we used verified=no, surveyed=no, ground_survey=no > or what. Without any such tag then people wishing > to check everything on the ground are really stuck when people helpfully (or > unhelpfully depending on your viewpoint) add details from OS Opendata.
Isn't the source tag enough? Once I've surveyed things I change the source to survey. People looking for survey targets can just look for source*=OS* ? Perhaps though, the black cross of verified=no would make people some people happier. Out of the options you suggest I think verified=no is preferable as it has some established use with NaPTAN; but I'm not sure whether we should also prefix it with an import specific namespace (OSLocator:verified=no)? Craig _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
