On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 08:04:34 +0000 (UTC) BlueMM <[email protected]> wrote:
> John Smith <deltafoxtrot...@...> writes: > > 2009/9/23 BlueMM <bluemm1975-...@...>: > > > I think the preferred attribution scheme is to use source=gps as that is > > > what the actual source is & survey is ambiguous with proper survey > > > equipment. > > > > 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 > > "just because it's on the wiki..." > > Seriously, I think most on this list know the wiki isn't some authority on > OSM, > it's editable by anyone (even I added the source:name/ref tags to Map > Features). The wiki has been that way from the almost the beginning (September 2006) in regards to source=survey And we've been over this many times on the talk-au list that source=survey is correct for any survey where you actually go to the place you are mapping. However I like what John put up: >>> source=survey >>> survey=gps >>> gps=model.... as this then shows that you've gone and visited the place, checked it with gps, theodolite, etc and have surveyed it. If you put the tag as source=gps how does any one know that it's actually from you having visited the location with a gps or just tracing someone elses gpx file upload. > Anyway, back to the point, the source=survey issue was brought up a while ago > on > Talk and a few contributors that I respect for their opinions said that > source=gps would be better when collecting the data from GPS (presumably > consumer grade GPS). I'd argue that source=survey is ambiguous because you > have > to look up the definition to discover what it means. Imagine going up to a > non-OSM user and asking them to guess what was used for collecting mapping > data > when it is marked as source=survey. I envisage the day when more edits come > from > new users than experienced contributors, especially as barriers are being > reduced over time, therefore I think reducing ambiguities is important. And they were only a vocal minority who suggested promoted this. It would mean to a non-OSM user that someone physically visited the area and in some way mapped it. How they mapped it (gps, theodolite, compass and chain) is unimportant. -- Cheers Ross _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
