Hi,
On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Adam Martin wrote:
> That is the key here. Deleting information without replacing it with
> something more accurate is inherently destructive. There must be
> some thought as to what will be put back or one is essentially
> ripping the map up simply because you don't like how something looks
> or how it closely it follows a given rule.
On a general note, edits *have* been reverted in the past for the simple
reason of not following a given rule, without looking at whether the
edit improved the visuals or not.
For "normal mappers", OSM ususally encourages them to map what they can
or know - no need to do it perfectly. Even a street drawn from memory
("I know I took a left here and then popped out onto XY road later, so
let me pencil in that road...) is ok for manual mapping.
For imports, we expect a certain minimum quality and if the importer
cannot produce that then we ask them to simply hold off the import until
they (or someone else) can.
The reason for the difference in approaches is that a productive
importer can import data in one day that takes several person-years to
fix and that will even have a detrimental effect on manual mapping of
other features (what Paul Ramsey writes further down-thread), whereas
imperfect data contributed by normal mappers comes at a rate where it is
realistic to assume that other normal mappers can fix it.
Data imports can have a negative effect on map quality (not even talking
of community engagement). "It looks nice on the map" can be a
treacherous criterion; beneath the surfaceit can still be rubbish, and
rubbish should not be imported into OSM even if it looks nice.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
