Hello Christoph, As I read your message, I failed to see your points. I might be missing something obvious, or at least clear for some advanced mappers. Maybe you could explain in some more details the problems with this mapping guide?
On 25 July 2017 at 15:54, Christoph Hormann <[email protected]> wrote: > I am frequently amazed by the complete lack of distinct mentioning of > the need of verifiability for information entered into the OSM database > (both geometries and tags) in HOT instructions. Mapping instructions > like in [1] to me seem just schocking - not only in light of the > projects in question but also because of what is presented there to OSM > newbies as good practice. What is so shocking in these mapping instructions [1], "in light of the projects in question"? What is so shocking in these mapping instructions [1] "because of what is presented [...] as good practice"? > Fixing that is not a matter of technological measures and mapping tools, > it is a matter of developing and communicating a mapping culture based > on OSMs good practice [2]. OSMs good practice [2] is a long page. Would you please elaborate on which OSMs good practice, these mapping instructions are lacking? All questions are asked in true and good faith, to learn. Your answers would be valuable to me. -- althio > [1] > https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1PR7xn9ooqguswP0PuzMPD_hYHiLsr3THbtlhVBXL-Lk/edit#slide=id.ge869b0762_2_195 > [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
