Mar 23, 2019, 9:59 AM by si...@poole.ch: > > While there's a certain amount of unnecessary database bloat caused by > creating a new version, the real objection is that these tags tend to > survive in areas with low maintenance, aka low amounts of gardening. > Producing false updates (aka no real content) just obscures that fact > and makes it more difficult to determine which areas need to be revisted. > > It seems to me as not a real problem. There are many, many different indicators of such places and automatic edits are suitable to remove only very small part of them. I am pretty sure that after making all possible automatic edits it would be still easy to locate such abandoned regions and human editing time could be used for things more useful than manual removal of pointless tag polluting tag lists. See for example http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/ <http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/> (depending on location one may prefer different reports) We have 800+ objects with source="Google Maps" (yes, it is on my todo list, yes I notified DWG long time ago). See http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Hge <http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Hge> The bottleneck is not "we will run out of things to fix" or "we will run out of easy to find places to repair", the bottleneck is time of mappers. TIGER mess alone in USA is enough for decades or years of remapping, HOT low quality mapping in Africa or Haiti has massive amount of easy to find fixable data, there are millions of instances of tags that has no reason to be present. I see no point in wasting my time during normal editing on manual tag removal of keys or tags that never, ever can be worth keeping and I would prefer to do it automatically.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
