2009/1/8 David Lynch <[email protected]>: > I think that "temporary" and "historical" prefixes are the best answer > to this, possibly with a relation for roads that are different due to > the same event, project, etc.
I'd keep historical out entirely. I see the point of temporary/intermittent data, and construction type planning data, but I think maybe historical geometries are a little beyond the scope of OSM as it is. Putting in battlefields or other historical notes relating to a location seem fine, but I'm imagining the scenario where someone is trying to trace a 1575 map of London into the DB... followed by a 1675 map... I don't think we really want to encourage that without a database and project which has actually been designed to cope. Don't forget that deleting the data doesn't actually put it beyond reach -- it's still there in the OSM history if someone wants to come and retrieve it -- it's obviously not a good way of storing historical data because it doesn't tell us why it was deleted (deleted in reality, or just in our DB), but it does mean we can be relatively sensible about keeping the main view up to date with things that aren't there any more. Dave _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
