Your entire argument is based on the premise that neighborhood boundaries are subjective and unverifiable, and while that may be true for your neighborhood it is not true for mine. So why shouldn't I map what I can easily verify on the ground?
Bryce On Jun 15, 2013, at 7:54 AM, Serge Wroclawski <emac...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Clifford Snow <cliff...@snowandsnow.us> > wrote: >> >> I wonder if it time to accept that we are unable to reach a consensus. > > On what issue are we unable to reach a consensus? The original > proposer, Martijn, after reading the arguments put forth, has decided > he agrees with both Ian and myself. > >> Can we agree to let the local community decide which way to proceed? > > > They are in >> the best position to know the issues surrounding neighborhood borders. >> There didn't seem to be any show-stoppers in the arguments for >> nodes/polygons. > > There were several issues brought up. The issues brought up were: > > 1. The idea that in many neighborhoods around the country, everything > about these neighborhoods is subjective, and largely driven by opinion > and real estate agents. > > 2. Neighborhoods don't have clear boundries, so polygons were a poor fit. > > 3. OSM is not a good place for non-observable data of any sort. > > 4. There is not a way to have "consensus" on a neighborhood boundary > because of its subjective nature. Two individuals may share entirely > differing views and both have equal "correctness", since it's a matter > of opinion. > > 5. Places can, and often are part of multiple neighborhoods, and OSM's > place classification system doesn't handle this. > > 6. Nodes are bad substitutes for polygons because one can only assume > that a node's idea of an "area" corresponds to a radius, which isn't > the case in many cases. > > 7. There are wonderful tools and existing datasets which OSMers can > use to capture this same information. > > > OSM is not entirely built around consensus, but I'm concerned because > I don't know how you can measure "the local community" in its opinion. > > I'm also a bit concerned when the idea of community consensus is > thrown out the window for total localism. While I agree that sometimes > things should be done without every single member of the community > approving, we should strive for larger community building when > possible. > > - Serge > > _______________________________________________ > 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
