Alex Mauer wrote: > Richard Fairhurst wrote: >> That statement is just... wrong. Really, really flabbergastingly >> wrong. > > Well, it's my opinion. You're going to have to revisit the route > anyway > to find out the road names, so why not kill 2 birds with 1 stone?
It's not "you're going to", though; it's "the OSM community is going to". On a cross-country bike route like that, I'd actually say there's not much point taking down the road names. The rural roads don't have names anyway. In the villages and towns, meanwhile, there's not much point in one passing cyclist taking down the name of a single through- route - you're going to need a "cul-de-sac mapper" to do all the adjacent roads anyway. Same goes for an inter-urban project like http:// wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/WikiProject_United_Kingdom_A_Roads . It's a very good use of people's time to get this done quickly, even at the expense of neglecting street names along the way - it makes OSM much more useful for routing and for small-scale maps. > But you have to accept that in that case you're not doing > everything you could be. Oh sure, I'm not going to dispute that (things like "work" get in the way there too). But to say it's "not conscientious" isn't right. Ultimately many mappers make all completeness issues shallow anyway. ;) cheers Richard _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk