2009/9/23 John Smith <deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com>: > > No, source=survey isn't ambiguous at all it's spelt out clearly on the > map features page: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features#Annotation >
Actually, that is ambiguous - or rather incomplete. It says "gpx track or other physical survey" There is no distinction between gps (accuracy +/- 5-10m) and a theodolite (or whatever they use these days) survey - accuracy +/- 2-3cm). The argument goes that we should leave the survey tag for real surveys, and use gps for gps based ones. This comes up in the talk list from time to time - I haven't seen it lately, though. Personally I think it's too late to salvage the survey tag now, if we want to make the distinction we'd need to create two other tags and start using them instead. Or assume all survey tags are low quality, but you wouldn't be sure. This is the argument for using source=gps - at least we're splitting it off from survey so that we know which type of survey it is, and we're not losing the data if we decide we should differentiate later. As a side note, I get the impression that the complaints about tagging GPS tracks as survey often come from professionals in the geospace fields. The idea of calling something as approximate as a gps track a survey just freaks them right out. And they worry that people who acquire the data might misunderstand the tag - it has a technical meaning that we are not using. Stephen _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au