On 28.04.19 11:43, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > Please suggest any improvements to the wording or corrections: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability#Geometry
I'm afraid I can't support the addition of this new rule. Yes, it's often not possible to agree on a precise border for these features. But nevertheless, there are typically areas that are definitely part of them, and other areas there are definitely not part of them. The above is verifiable geographic information, so it ought not be off-limits for OSM. I've always thought of mapping features with fuzzy boundaries as an unsolved challenge for our data model, not as something that should be categorically excluded from OSM. One could imagine, for example, a relation containing two polygons for the feature's "minimum" and "maximum" extent (describing the parts of the world that are verifiably part of/not part of the feature), with a grey area of uncertainty in between. With your recommended solution of placing a node "near the center of the feature", capturing this useful knowledge is not possible. It also doesn't make logical sense to me: If it were indeed impossible to verifiably establish even an approximate boundary of the feature, how can we verifiably establish the feature's center? Tobias _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
