On 03/04/15 14:01, Richard Welty wrote: > but i had been thinking about starting a new thread separate from the > railroad discussion bringing up the issue of perceptions of projects like > OHM.
While the idea of maintaining objects on the main OSM database which have a physical trace fits in with 'mapping what is on the ground', we *DO* need a much more user friendly way of merging secondary data of what ever source with a current overlay. But I do seem to be banging my head against a brick wall over data that is currently live in OSM, but which may become obsolete due to later developments. There is a need for legacy data to be mapped in parallel with the current on the ground situation but there is no consensus on how the two should be managed in parallel? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk _______________________________________________ Historic mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic
