Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: > Verification is a whole new ballgame.
I think throughout this discussion there is tendency to get hung up on the word "complete", which has been used as a shorthand but is being interpreted differently. In everyday use it has an implication of perfection and that there is nothing more to be said. I think what we should be talking about is an area being "filled in", without implying perfection or immutability. You should expect as high a proportion of mistakes in a filled-in area as in an incomplete one, but fewer omissions. However, if there is a blank space on the map, you can assume that it really is empty in a filled-in area, but you would not know if it was in an incomplete area. Measures of quality and guarantees of correctness require filled-inness, but I think should be regarded as more advanced concepts. I agree with Andy, we should walk before we run - start with an implemention of filled-inness - verification, etc. can come later. Chris _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
