Frederik Ramm wrote: >Sent: 24 September 2008 12:29 AM >To: Ed Loach >Cc: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org >Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] not_in_map_features > >Hi, > >Ed Loach wrote: > >> If I'd known >> I could have just gone in and revised it to make everything that >> much more logical and consistent I'd have done it already <bg>. > >Map Features is there to document what we have (and by implication to >suggest that new things could be mapped in the same way if practical). > >So if you change what we have, or if you introduce something entirely >new we didn't have before, then you should indeed amend Map Features. > >Just revising Map Features on a whim without also revising the data >would, however, be counterproductive because, as I said, Map Features is >there to document what we have (and not to say "I'd like you to do it >this way in the future please"). > >If you intend to make a large-scale change to the data that's there, >some advance discussion is in order and you should only proceed if there >is widespread acceptance. This does not necessarily require writing a >proposal on the Wiki. And widespread acceptance does not mean "I called >for a vote and of the 8 people who participated, 7 were in favour". >
I'd like to reinforce Frederik on all of this. +1 Cheers Andy >Bye >Frederik > >-- >Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > >_______________________________________________ >Talk-GB mailing list >Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.7.1/1687 - Release Date: 23/09/2008 >6:32 PM _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb