> Un-surveyable data is a nuisance for everyone working with OSM data; except for those mappers which it empowers by telling said mappers where they are allowed to survey, and probably others.
> it disempowers the mapper who works with the data because they have > to simply accept it as a fact if they cannot see it on the ground. > > Adding such data to OSM sends the message to mappers: "If there's a > mismatch between OSM data and what you see on the ground, better > don't mess with the OSM data because surely someone has put that > there for a reason." Now that just doesn't make sense. If it's something that cannot be seen on the ground then there cannot be a mismatch with what people see on the ground. I believe there is extremely broad agreement about including certain kinds of lines that cannot be seen on the ground, such as administrative boundaries. You are of course free to express your disagreement, but please be careful not to misrepresent the general consensus of the community. -- Jason _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
