On 20.09.2010 10:12, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
M?rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I prefer asuming that a gate is closed (I tag them with access=private
in these cases anyway) or you have to indicate allowed traffic
(foot=yes, bicycle=yes, etc.)). Why do we have to have a default?
The default should be applied by the software evaluating the data. The
default is not an "OpenStreetMap default" but an "application
default". A conservative routing engine might assume an unspecified
gate to always be closed, while others might simply apply a slight
penalty for a route containing a gate, or even assume it is alway open.
Here we come to a great possibility for software to contribute to the
OSM data.
Wherever possible the software should provide a mechanism to add the
data, if needed.
Of course a conservative setting would avoid gates for being sure, but
even that could be adjustable for the user: "I have time, it doesn't
matter to turn around at wrong data - but I will fix it then".
I think, in future we need end user software with the ability to edit
the OSM, because mapping new stuff is much easier and makes more fun
than to fix small errors.
talk@openstreetmap.org
Peter
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
