Lester Caine wrote: > Dave F. wrote: > >> Lester Caine wrote: >> >>> But well mapped rivers don't have ways down their middle >>> >> Really? >> Care to expand on that please? >> > > MOST rivers are now being mapped fully and so are areas rather than a line > with > some arbitrary width. So there is no 'way' corresponding to some arbitrary > mid > point to the river ... > >
I contest your assertation that 'most' is accurate, but that's another point. But... http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Driverbank There should be a way to indicate both the direction of flow, bit also the route, where applicable, for boat routes. To show that it goes through a lock rather than a weir for example. & also for boundaries, of course. >>> Even more important, we need a way to maintain historic information >>> such as '1995 boundary' where later boundaries are different. >>> >> Why do we need to do that? >> I delete out of date data. >> Please explain why you think we should keep it? >> > > Just because YOU are not using the data does not entitle you to delete it! > And because you might want to use it doesn't mean it should be kept in the database of a *current* map. I wasn't suggesting that because I do something a certain way it was correct, just that I do it. However, is this being done by others? I've yet to come across it in use. Do you have a link to a wiki page? > The whole reason *I* am interested in OSM is as a base for documenting my > genealogical data. Being able to check a location at some point in time is > important and while many of the attempts to get time data properly tagged > have > not been accepted, simple information like 'constructed=1980' would at least > allow maps to be rendered to provide a view in a particular year. ONCE that > is > possible, then the related boundary information is also important. > > >> If a footpath gets moved do you think I should still show a way & mark >> it as 'this is where it used to go'? >> > 'closed=2007' makes perfect sense to me. People then coming back to an area > that > they walked 30 years ago would then see why they can't follow the same route > today? > How far back do you suggest going? AFAIS, we are up to our necks in current data let alone trawling through OoD data. I live in a old Roman city, if I had the patience & time to go back that far, the database would be unreadable & unusable with so much info layered on top of each other. > Just like 'micromapping', historic information may not be of interest to > everybody, but moving forward, why would you NOT want to maintain data that > has > already been mapped. We just need agreement on how it is maintained - since > the > 'history' of object edits is simply no substitute for mapping historic data. _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
