On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 23:18:17 -0400 Russ Nelson <nel...@crynwr.com> wrote:
> But what gives them the right to delete things that other people CAN > see and DO want to have in OSM? Because mapping thoroughly destroyed objects that no longer exist (like rail lines where even earthworks are levelled and houses are built over place where railway used to be - something defended in this thread by some) is a dangerous precedent that would lead to a complete mess (like mapping destroyed and no longer existing objects and slapping end_date on them or mapping objects that never existed and pretending that putting start_date on them makes it OK). Mapping proposed and potential (so not existing, unverifiable and likely to never appear) is already major problem in my region. Adding to that objects that no longer exist is an extremely poor idea. Therefore I will delete any object that no longer exists or never existed (after communication with mapper or other method to verify whatever I am mistaken, with exception of highway=proposed). It is important to avoid treating mapping completely destroyed railways as OK - we already have terrible highway=proposed (mapped in some valid places and many where projects are pure political fiction or outright SF - like highway=proposed that used to be mapped across Boering Strait*). * Yes, I deleted it. I am not OK with mapping "abandoned railroads" (as in "traces of it are present") but railways where only trace is presence on old documents should not be mapped. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
