On 6/1/2016 7:18 AM, Richard wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 07:01:07PM +0200, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2016-05-31 15:03 GMT+02:00 Richard <[email protected]>:
often enough I get messages from people saying that drawing a bridge
or culvert for every minor highway/waterway crossing causes more
trouble than use and I tend to agree.
If you and they don't 'like' them .. don't enter them and don't render them.
There are a few things in OSM that I have no interest in .. but I don't
advocate there demotion.
I disagree. Either there is a bridge / culvert in reality, and in this case
why wouldn't we want it in OSM, or there isn't and then it is a simple
error waiting to be corrected.
so what do you do if you drove along a track know there is not a single
ford but don't have enough information to know whether there is
a bridge or culvert in most places? There are some notable bridges but
everything that is notable probably deserves at least a man_made=bridge
anyway while the rest ist just I don't get wet feet here.
If you don't know if there are bridges/culverts then you don't map them ...
Which trouble do these elements cause? I realize they make it harder to
apply modifications to long (i.e. probably more pieces) ways, but on the
other hand, casual mistakes also don't extend very far.
I have seen many examples of culverts applied to the wrong segment
of the way.. theese seem to go easily unnoticed for long periods of
time.
Any entry is prone to error. Even ford=no!
Introducing a new tag/value just introduces more possible errors if you want to
look at it that way.
You are looking for a solution to a problem, but your proposed solution just
adds yet another potential problem.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
