On 12-Feb-16 20:22, Lester Caine wrote:
On 12/02/16 19:34, John Aldridge wrote:
On 12-Feb-16 17:31, Lester Caine wrote:
I adopted the standard of official_name=xxx where the edubase listing
differs from the signage or other local 'format'...
I'm not objecting, but why did you feel you wanted to clone information
from edubase into OSM at all?
Given the presence of the ref:edubase tag, I can look the official
information up if I want to know (and without the risk of it becoming
out of date).
I have no problem on them being removed,
I have no intention of removing anything -- I'm merely curious!
but while cross checking they
were a useful reference, and seeing the entry I can see how many are
different in edubase.
You mean they serve the same function as not:name does for street names
in reducing noise from automated consistency checking? OK, I can see
that's useful.
But don't assume that the data
provided by the third party are more up to date than the OSM version ;)
But in this case of official_name I thought you were saying the
appropriate value was the value from edubase, so by definition it
couldn't be out of date there.
A substantial number of the website links I loaded are out of date on
the edubase records :( OSM is now more accurate than edubase ...
Now that doesn't surprise me at all! I absolutely agree that putting
(e.g.) website information into OSM is appropriate -- especially if
edubase is wrong.
--
Cheers,
John
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
