I don't think they should be deleted, it's not easy to work out townland names on the OSM website let alone any GPS device you might be using. Then you also have the subtownlands which may share the name of the townland but be centered in a different location, they should be tagged as locality=subtownland but aren't always.
Dafo ________________________________ From: Mark O'Donovan <shif...@posteo.net> Sent: Thursday 3 October 2019 15:01 To: talk-ie@openstreetmap.org <talk-ie@openstreetmap.org> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk-ie] Duplicate townland nodes Thanks. If I don't hear any dissenting opinions i'll clean a few of these next week. Unfortunately the openstreetmap.org map will be a bit bare afterwards. Regards, Mark On 03/10/2019 14:48, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: > On 03/10/2019, Mark O'Donovan <shif...@posteo.net> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> The two items below have the same tags and appear twice in the FDroid >> version of Maps.me. >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5910219 >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3524289126 >> >> locality : townland >> name : Knockrobin >> place : locality >> >> >> In these situations should the node be removed? > > Yes. One OSM object for one real-world feature. > > The node was created before the relation. It's pretty common to > "upgrade" a node to an area once more time or information is > available, and sometimes we forget to remove the original node. > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ie mailing list > Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie > _______________________________________________ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie _______________________________________________ Talk-ie mailing list Talk-ie@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ie
