On 5 Mar 2010, at 3:29 , Richard Weait wrote: > On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Apollinaris Schoell <ascho...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> didn't know this page exists. >> Fully agreed this is the best way to do. It's not perfect and some >> deviations will make sense here and there. > > I suppose adding tags for cfcc and hfcs makes sense as an addition to > existing tagging. > > Using those classifications to replace the judgment and experience of > an OSM surveyor on the ground is a bad idea. The cfcc and hfcs both > fail in terms of "observability" by ground surveyors and so those > paper classifications are less reliable. > > Be respectful of the work of surveyors on the ground. >
absolutely, the statement was not meant to be evaluated and used by armchair mappers. We have some big problems with this kind of edits where people trace from yahoo or sources like this and mess up the map. > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
