On 11/3/13 12:17 PM, Martijn van Exel wrote: > Administrative boundaries are generally not verifiable by ground > surveying, and are not straightforward to edit. This causes > information rot. What good is administrative boundary information that > are not trustworthy? Moreover, they are freely[1] and easily available > from an authoritative source. For all these reasons combined, I would > favor them not being in OSM at all. > on the other hand, people expect to see at least some of these boundaries in a map, and apps like Nominatum and various GPS apps (OsmAnd being one) use them.
i understand your point of view, but removing them will be very disruptive to a bunch of important data consumers. what i favor is going to a multi layer approach where some layers of OSM are ground verifiable things and others may not be. a consumer could choose to use some layers, and the admin boundaries (which are a real problem) can be moved and we can consider how to approach them differently because what we're doing now isn't working real well. richard
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
