2010/1/3 Lester Caine <[email protected]> > It is however a very good example of where people have taken the trouble to > ACTUALLY map reality and their efforts have been destroyed! At the end of > the > day everything needs to be mapped fully, and there is no case for REMOVING > tracks that are mapped, and every case for providing a means to properly > replace > 'shorthand' with fully mapped detail. > > I agree to the goal of getting everything on the map. But you can not conclude that in some cases the best and most operative description is not reached by replacing one representation by a better one, e.g. in some cases removing shadow bicycle paths or sidewalks and incorporate them in the road tags.
If an agreed OSM project goal exists, where uncompromised and non-reflected micro-mapping [the consequence of your phrase "everything needs to be mapped fully"] is described as the ultimate goal, please help me with a pointer. Then this discussion is over, and I must accept loosing some of my faith in the overall usefulness of the project. Otherwise I think we are obliged to continuously put some thought into how we really end up with the best and most operative map description. Claus -- -- Civilingeniør ph.d. Claus Hindsgaul Edvard Thomsens Vej 19, 5. th DK-2300 KBH S
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
