On 20/02/2014 22:40, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 20.02.2014 23:04, Dave F. wrote:
There's a general consensus that attaching polygons to ways that
represent roads was a bad idea.
Not really.
There is not a consensus but a ceasefire. Everyone is free to map this
as they like, and to change it if there's a need - e.g. someone else has
connected the field to the road, now you want to map the fence, so you
need to split it apart. That's ok. Similarly, someone re-doing the whole
area from better imagery or whatever has every right to map as he
pleases - if they thing they can be more efficient by joining
boundaries, more power to them.
What is *not* ok is one person "cleaning up" after the other without
actually adding any other improvement.
I.e. if the other guy has connected the fields and the roads and you
have been *only* pulling them apart without contributing anything else
to the area in question, then you should have let them be;
This bit I disagree with. Field or cemetery boundaries etc don't go to
the centreline of the road. "Pulling them apart" & placing them where
they are in reality is improving OSM by making it more accurate. Even if
not boundary is added.
on the other
hand, if the other guy has merged fields and roads that previously were
separate, then they shouldn't have done that.
This whole question is essentially a matter of taste, and you are
allowed to map according to your taste, and discouraged from enforcing
your taste for others.
Disagree again, I'm afraid. Improving OSM's accuracy supersedes taste.
To clarify I'm only referring to instances of polygons attached to
roads. Differing landuse areas abutting each other, fields to
residential, for example, is OK. However on saying that it does often
make selecting a polygon difficult if attached on all sides.
Cheers
Dave F.
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
