On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 5:31 PM, David Murn <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 22:25 +0100, Laurence Penney wrote: >> For the record, I'm 100% against OSM becoming a place for general >> historical data ... > > Just out of interest, are you 100% against OSM keeping recent history > data? If a building is demolished, do you believe that deleting the way > should remove any trace of that from OSM, or do you believe that OSM > should retain a history? How long should that history be retained? In > 10 years, would you advocate that any historic data (objects deleted > over n years ago) be deleted, to avoid cluttering the database? If OSM > had existed 20 years ago, would you be advocating that the database be > kept clean, so that only current data is in it? > > OSM, by its nature, is excellent for retaining historic data, for > example if a road is realigned, you have a history that shows how it was > realigned, or if a road changes name, there exists a history of previous > names.
When someone changes the name=* value on a way representing a road, how are you supposed to know if the name of the road changed, or if the old (or new) data was (or is) just incorrect? OSM is not, "by its nature", excellent for retaining this type of data. It could be made to support it, but it would be a lot of work. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
