Could the data be included in https://osm.mathmos.net/survey/ ?
On 21/07/2020 22:42, Colin Smale wrote:
On 2020-07-21 22:54, Mark Goodge wrote:
It's the errors which are more of a problem, because it's generally
better not to map something than to map it wrongly.
This is a difficult point. Data is never 100% complete, and frequently
not 100% accurate. At what point it becomes better not to have the
thing in OSM at all, is rather subjective.
If the location was only accurate to ±50m, would it still be good enough?
If the operator was not tagged, would it still be good enough?
Is an "imperfect" object in OSM more likely to get corrected than a
missing object is to get added? Should I not add a missing object
because I cannot be sure of the "operator" for example? Talking about
the charging points data set, how can one detect what is an error?
I would say, get the data out there, and let the world feed back any
inaccuracies to the source for inclusion in the next version.
_______________________________________________
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
