On 30 August 2011 01:01, Tom Hughes <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes I should have added that, in this case, my preference would be to remove > the object altogether as aerial imagery coverage areas are not real on the > ground objects that should be in our database.
Particularly in this specific case, as nearmap coverage can't be used to derive OSM objects any more. Stephen _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
