On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Russ Nelson <r...@cloudmade.com> wrote:
> If it's "This is what NYS DEC says it manages", then no, it doesn't make > ANY sense > to change it. Then this data clearly doesn't belong in OSM. > If the data is "These are NYS's State Forests", then > there's plenty of reason to change them. Perhaps there's a typo, or > some piece of data which simply doesn't make sense. Data is produced > by people, and can have mistakes it. This data is fine for OSM. Someone imported the PA state forests from some government source a while back without any discussion, and they're doing just fine. Perhaps you just need to shift your perception of what you're importing? The canonical source of official government boundaries is not going to be the OSM data, and should never be. However, the presence of a state forest is useful data that belongs in OSM. This does not mean that the latter has to imply the former, even if that's the original source. We've also imported state and county borders from the TIGER data set. These may be quasi-official, but they've still been edited in multiple ways (as mentioned by others). What makes NY state forests so special? In short, I think you have every right to monitor data you've edited/imported and revert incorrect edits (within reason). However, I reject the idea that there is any data that belongs in OSM that "makes no sense to edit". If you can't edit it, then by definition it shouldn't be in a wiki-style map. -Ted
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
