Pieren writes: > There is a large consensus on that in the community. Why are you > insisting ? If you like, check the OHM project which is dedicated > for historical maps.
We've been through this before. You're just insisting on your view and claiming that everyone agrees with you. There is no consensus; rather a number of people want to map disued / abandoned / dismantled railways. Some people don't! Good for them! I'm happy for them that they don't. But what gives them the right to delete things that other people CAN see and DO want to have in OSM? The problem is that this disagreement is not symmetric. It's not like the power=sub_station or power=substation disagreement. You don't have one side saying "we don't map power lines" and the other saying "but we do." No, instead, we have one side saying "YOU CANNOT MAP THIS." That is not how we do things here -- and THAT is the true consensus. I'm fine with you mapping the things you want. Why aren't you fine with me mapping the things I want? Why the urge to delete? Why encourage other people to delete things that are not accidents, not TIGER mistakes, but things that people WANT in OSM and have PUT in OSM? I simply cannot comprehend the desire to delete. You want to improve OSM? Fine. Add things that aren't there. Contribute to Richard Welty's collection of fire hydrants. He's got a useful project going on there. The Bing aerials are good enough now that you can see traffic lights. There are a TON of missing ones. You improve OSM by adding things. You make OSM worse by deleting things. Don't make OSM worse. Don't be that guy everyone hates. -- --my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
