You are right. I've moved "Don't map temporary events and temporary features" to it's own main heading after Verifiability.
I believe "Map what's on the ground", "Don't map historic events" and "Don't map your local legislation..." are clearly related to verifiability. The later two reference "verifiability" in the text, and "Map what's on the ground" is related, because the text of a sign or other real-world object is easier to verify than the accuracy of old maps. On 7/5/19, Tobias Knerr <[email protected]> wrote: > On 04.07.19 05:53, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: >> 2 Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic >> events, temporary features, local legislation etc) > > In my opinion, the practices that you've turned into subheadings of the > verifiability section are not merely special cases of verifiability. > > For example, temporary features are perfectly verifiable (until they > cease to exist, of course). The reasons why it's not usually considered > good practice to map them include the unsustainable maintenance effort > and the impact on offline use of our data. > > So I feel these items are really their own separate practices, not part > of verifiability. If you want to avoid having too many top-level > headings, you might still be able to group the three "Don't map..." > rules into a common section. > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
