The main reason why this data set is not useful is that the PFI contractor running Nottingham Streetlights is about 40% through a programme to replace them all. Broadly speaking I'm against imports if not thought through and not done without some consultation with local mappers. I am, however, wholly against imports which will rapidly refer to objects which dont exist, and which likely impose some burden of maintenance on those who map in the area regularly.
The NaPTAN import of 2009, for which I was responsible in Nottingham and Notts, shows what happens to such data. Jerry On 30 July 2014 18:12, Brian Prangle <[email protected]> wrote: > The source is opendata from Nottingham and the data refers to a physical > entity- so why revert it except to enforce a point of etiquett? The > criterion of usefulness is not valid. I thought the whole point of entering > data is that someone somewhere will find a use for it - you might not see > its usefulness, but how can you know if it's not of some use to someone > else? Contact the user and try to engage them - not piss them off by > removing their hard work > > Regards > > Brian > > > On 29 July 2014 21:51, SK53 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Don't need to say much more, other than it's an undiscussed import and if >> we'd thought it would be useful could have done it anytime in the past 18 >> months. >> >> Changeset is : https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/24412110 >> >> Will plan to revert in 1 days time if no further action by the mapper. >> >> Jerry >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-GB mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
