On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 7:28 AM, Ian Sergeant <inas66+...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But your overall point is surely that as long as we have the basics, if some > group of people want the extra information and are willing to gather it, and > some other group of people want to use the information and are willing to > render/route it, then all is good. Yeah, absolutely. As long as we have "the basics", which I'm assuming means a couple of tags with a couple of well defined meanings (like 2WD, 4WD etc). Then people can go nuts adding extra information, as long as it doesn't conflict. Sometimes people think that it's better to slice up information into lots of little "objective" facts, like (in the case of mountain bike trails), width, surface, grade, etc, rather than a "subjective" fact like trail rating. But in practice, it's impractical to collect that much information, and it's impractical to combine it back into a usable form for data consumers, so we lose twice. > We're here to use our data in new an innovative ways, right? Absolutely :) Steve _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
