Good point. Open for suggestions. But the goal is more to have somewhere to
refer newcomers to.
Op 28-jan.-2016 10:44 schreef "Jakka" :
> Question,consideration...
>
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Slowroads
>
> How will some one find the right w
Hi Wouter,
On 28-01-16 11:38, Wouter Hamelinck wrote:
>
> That is true but I'm missing a general mapping strategy, there is some
> widespread tag misuse IMHO.
>
>
> IMHO this is valid for any kind of mapping, even where there exist clear
> guidelines.
Yes you are totally right. But we
I totally agree with Wouter's list. And I leave the most edge cases in
OSM, even when they are only tagged with note=Weg XXX (no highway
tag). But the ones that are just crossing through houses, through
backyards, etc. I remove. Also the ones through fenced fields are
deleted. Again, it's about way
> That is true but I'm missing a general mapping strategy, there is some
> widespread tag misuse IMHO.
>
IMHO this is valid for any kind of mapping, even where there exist clear
guidelines.
It's really a binary thing, either it exists and verifiable in the
> field, or either it's not. We don't r
On 28-01-16 08:16, joost schouppe wrote:
> Marc,
> If by "they" you mean "trage wegen vzw", I think they have a pretty good
> understanding of what does and does not belong in Openstreetmap. They
> actively promote OSM use amongst their public, which is a good thing.
That is true but I'm missing a
Question,consideration...
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Slowroads
How will some one find the right wiki when he/she never heard of slow
roads? searching on path gives
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath,
track
http://wiki.open
Marc,
If by "they" you mean "trage wegen vzw", I think they have a pretty good
understanding of what does and does not belong in Openstreetmap. They
actively promote OSM use amongst their public, which is a good thing. But
if you mean mappers in general, I would say that we still could do more to
g
