On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 5:17 AM, Dave F <davefoxfa...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 26/05/2017 09:43, Florian Lohoff wrote: > >> >> So who is at fault? The one mentioning somethings missing - or the one >> putting some information into the map without closing the note? >> > > I think you're missing the point. There are a large number of pointless > notes, such as mentioning things which *aren't* missing, or ones such as > this, added today: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1008125#c2036202 > > We have no way of communicating with this person to ask them to stop or > confirm they're intentions. This is a note I would have closed myself. I'm actually surprised at the amount of debate in play. But, being familiar with the serial (as opposed to directional, Karlschruhe order of things that most of North America follows), I've not touched it as the assumption that is a house number is potentially accurate. I am personally using the note for a lot of purposes, and i am very >> thankful we have them. >> > > I believe Notes were a reasonable idea, but poorly implemented with little > control on how they're added or their content and limited methods of > verification. That could be said for the entire project as a whole. But here we are. That said, I don't think it would be an unreasonable control on the situation to expect people creating notes have an account, so that questions about the notes opened could be directed back to a potential real person. In the above example of just "281" without context, if this were Oklahoma, I would have closed it without any note on the following assumptions: 1. 281 would mean, in every North American addressing scheme I'm aware of locally, this would fall no more than 3 blocks from the addressing origin, which seems unlikely in this case. 2. Alternatively, it could be a speed limit, but that far from the centerline and *not* being a round number makes this unlikely. If it ended in 5 or 0, it could be inferred that they mean MPH; or ending in a 0, km/h, and then context of which side to determine direction, but since this is right on the building front, it's more likely to be an address. Particularly since 281 MPH is nearly mach 0.3 and 281 km/h is 170-something mph, and the highest speed limit in Oklahoma is 75 mph (120 km/h). I've left it alone anyway because I'm aware not everywhere in the world makes Karlschruhe-clean assumptions on speeds, particularly in the UK. Though it's obviously not a speed limit because I doubt something barely larger than an Oklahoma cycleway really has a speed limit of 281 km/h, much less 281 MPH.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
