I have to disagree with the first part of that. OSM is designed as somewhere where you can map pretty much anything that exists, as long as it can be verified. Part of the reason why we want them to map the way we map is because it shows clearly that while there is a path there, it is informal (so downstream users shouldn't treat it as a path) and usually considered private property (again, so downstream users shouldn't use it as a path). Tagging it that way also stops someone mapping from aerial imagery, previous GPS tracks, and other sources, from going and adding it back in. It's part of the reason why access tagging and lifecycle prefixes exist, to allow those features to be in the OSM database, but still reflect their status so downstream users can correctly represent those features.
I'd absolutely love for us to work with more government and non-government organisations to not only make it easier for us to build a more complete map, but to help them reflect information regarding their respective areas as accurately as possible, but that involves both sides working together, not just making changes and telling us how to use our database. The reverts only happen because they're wrong edits by our standards. We want them to edit and contribute in a way that allows them to correctly represent the status of their parks, and ensures that as a collaborative project, we don't go and continue to add in bad data unintentionally. Thanks, Andrew Welch m...@andrewwelch.net On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 at 22:13, Adam Steer <adam.d.st...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Tony. > > The first crux as I see it is that the OSM community doesn't listen. It is > unable to hear values other than some abstract academic notion of map > purity. > > The second crux is that OSM mappers are not responsible or accountable for > anything. So taking the view that "everyone should come to OSM and justify > themselves" is pretty weird and backwards. > > What about taking the approach "ok land managers what can we do to help > you?" And if the answer is "stop reverting parks service edits", then > respect that ... > > A better map isn't one with all the everything. It's one made respectfully > and responsibly. > > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
