On 24/08/2015, Balaco Baco <[email protected]> wrote: > buildings are usually > replaced much faster than maps are expected to last, and the work of > updating it twice, once for the "empty space, dem. building" and the > future "new building outline" is better done only one time.
It's nice to avoid unecessary version churn, but if a mapper keeps up with the real-world changes there's nothing wrong with updating OSM too. If you search the archives you'll find plenty of discussions on "mapping temporary features" and how ephemeral a feature needs to be before it loses its mapworthyness. For example a road closed during a weekend is a clear no-map, but construction work is usually considered mappable if it'll last a few months and there is a local mapper to keep track of the updates. "how long a map is expected to last" is a tricky question especially for OSM. Paper maps are often updated yearly but kept for decades in people's homes. Google Map has TOS that mostly forbid cacheing data yourself for later. Data on osm.org is updated minutely, but the osm data on a satnav may never get an update at all. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
