Thanks Mateusz
Women's refuges were mentioned as an example, an extreme one, that
illustrated certain principles, not because they weren't already being
handled well. Thanks for the information on mapping private
information but I think the discussion around refuges still stands.
'Any decent router will not route over them.' True but for the tracks
we are talking about I don't think a lot of people are using routers.
Re Don'tRender=yes, I never suggested it was a good idea, just a
challenge for others to come up with a better idea.
A licence condition for data users is that they have a public policy
for the Don'tRender tag
'That is fortunately impossible' why is it impossible?
'Note that deleting existing paths with "I do not want them rendered"
is not an acceptable edit'
I don't think anybody suggested it was.
'Russia does not get to decide whatever their military bases can be
mapped and rendered in OSM.'
Nobody said that Russia should should be able to. Its a point for
discussion. What do you think should happen? Why? Why single out Russia?
PS thanks Steve for your second email.
thanks Phil for your clarification on 'illegal'
Tony
Oct 23, 2020, 10:18 by fors...@ozonline.com.au:
I am not morally responsible if an ex partner kills a woman in a
women's refuge, he is, but I won't knowingly contribute to the
process. And it doesn't wash with me to say they should put a guard
at the door because I have mapped a refuge.
Not mapping ones that are private and not signed falls under not
mapping private info.
See
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Limitations_on_mapping_private_information
for an attempt to gather consensus opinion.
Re access=no, if I recollect correctly they still display in OSM,
only slightly more red.
This changed, now they display greish (less prominent)
You probably wouldn't notice. I haven't checked data users such as
Osmand and Strava.
Any decent router will not route over them.
Graeme
Thanks for your thoughts on 'how to'. I have given it some thought
and don't have any really good answers. Please think of a better
scheme.
I mentioned a Don'tRender=yes tag but worry it may be too
complicated for the benefit that results but here goes:
a land owner or manager can add a Don'tRender=yes tag
OSM.org map would honour the tag in map mode
This is a bad idea.
A licence condition for data users is that they have a public
policy for the Don'tRender tag
That is fortunately impossible.
By having the item visible at edit time it eliminates the cycle of
addition and deletion and edit wars.
You can do that by mapping line and tagging it with note.
Note that deleting existing paths with "I do not want them rendered"
is not an acceptable edit.
Let the mapping community decide whether the claim to be a land
owner or manager is credible, if two organisations have credible
claim to that then Don'tRender=disputed
Russia does not get to decide whatever their military bases can be
mapped and rendered in OSM.
I knowingly and deliberately violated
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_geographic_data_in_China
by mapping objects in China.
_____________________________________________________
This mail has been virus scanned by Australia On Line
see http://www.australiaonline.net.au/mailscanning
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
