Colin, it is a very common fallacy in OSM to claim that out of some sense of "fairness", the fact that there is already some data in OSM that violates some rules (e.g. boundaries being in OSM even though hardly verifiable on the ground) is an automatic enabler of any and all other content violating some rules.
This misconception needs to be fought whenever it is encountered. Data that is not verifiable on the ground is the absolute *exception* in OSM, and needs a very strong reason for being there. Administrative boundaries are very useful not only for users, but also for mappers, and hence allowed by common consent (and not everybody is happy with that). I don't see nearly as strong a reason to allow the mapping of "things that were", *especially* if something else is there in their place today. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
