Bryce Nesbitt <bry...@obviously.com> writes: > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Greg Troxel <g...@ir.bbn.com> wrote: >> >> Also, if a tag isn't rendered in the default mapnik view, then those >> elements are unlikely to be cleaned up (absent a special render for a >> community of interest, which the cyclemap layer might be). > > It's a chicken and egg situation. With only 50 some nodes, it is hard to > argue for rendering.
I suppose, but if those are useful, it shouldn't hurt anyone else. > The stations exist: the local mapper request is to position the node > exactly, as the features are too small (in general) to pick up on an > air photo. When thinking about accuracy, I often ask myself "is this feature good enough that someone trying to use the map for some reasonable purpose will succeed" (less clearly :-). If a trail in the woods is off 10m, but the geometry is mostly ok, then that's better than no trail. Similarly, if someone goes to where a bike station is mapped, will they be able to find it with a few seconds of looking? If so, that's probably ok. Given all that, there's the question of notes. I add notes for things to be fixed, even if I expect to be the fixer. But I try to be aware of the clutter/useful tradeoff. It might be that the new nodes should get a FIXME tag or something, which is less than a note. My real point is that adding a large number and putting them all in the notes view seems like a bit too much. I am sympathetic to having a set of things that might need local review, and perhaps some sort of "low-importance extra-detail note" might be in order, but that leads down a messy slope.
pgplzAjpBpucr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk