Marking a place as complete is one discussion. I have been "wasting" thoughts on regular verification. How do we make sure that we always stay informed about changes over time, sort of regular reviews?
mallok -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Datum: 12/01/08 20:08 An: [email protected] Betreff: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM needs a measure for completeness 80n wrote: > > In a sense I'm already doing this. The very last thing I do when I've > completed an area is to add landuse=residential (only where appropriate, > of course). I could easily add complete=level-n to this landuse boundary. > Surely completeness is relative to purpose? I have areas where all roads between settlements are filled in but not the settlements, other urban areas where all roads are filled in and named, others where all roads and footpaths are complete. I haven't yet done any areas which have complete traffic lights, pedestrian crossings, turn restrictions, bus routes, administrative boundaries, or navigational information for waterways. The possible purposes are pretty orthogonal - rather than a set of numbered completeness, you'd need to allow multiple 'complete_for=purpose' tags. And if you attach that to landuse boundaries, what do you do in large urban areas where it's all residential? Graham > 80n > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk > <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
