On Tuesday 22 March 2016, Frank Villaro-Dixon wrote: > > Can you give me an example ?
I probably could (after all i am on record for saying waterbody mapping in OSM is a practical case of the infinite monkey theorem) but right now i don't have the time to look for a good real world example. In principle many cases where the way you'd remove a tag from has additional tags the meaning of those tags will change when you remove a tag. Also cases where the way in question forms the division between two water areas you will usually run into trouble. On a principal level removing an ambiguity will always mean you remove possible interpretations of the data and your bot simply cannot know if the interpretations it removes are actually incorrect and the remaining interpretation is the correct one. > This algorithm won't loose any information. It's merely deleting > duplicates, so where is the problem ? You are only looking at it from a formal side and based on a specific, subjective interpretation of tagging rules which is not appropriate. See also http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct As others have said the best way to improve waterbody data in OSM is by actually doing mapping work and correcting errors based on local knowledge or imagery. You can believe me when i say that factual errors and inaccuracies are much more common and harmful problems w.r.t. water area mapping than basic tagging inconsistencies. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
