On 2020-05-25 18:52, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> Even if "Nothing is "approved"" is true it does not mean that nothing is
> forbidden.
> Can you name one tag that is "forbidden"? Does that mean a standing
> instruction to all mappers to remove it whenever it is found, or a license to
> do a seek-and-destroy across the whole database? Or does "forbidden" not
> quite mean "may not appear in OSM"? "Frowned upon" possibly.
I would say that
"Does that mean a standing instruction to all mappers to remove it
whenever it is found,
or a license to do a seek-and-destroy across the whole database?"
applies to several things (listed below).
>> Is there any case of a whole class of objects being removed from OSM on the
>> grounds
>> that they "do not belong"? Who would burn their fingers on that?
>> Depends on what you mean by "whole class of objects".
>
> Class, category, whatever... A subset of the objects in the OSM data with
> common characteristics.
>
>> If we are looking to set a precedent for that it would probably be wiser to
>> pick on a less controversial and emotive subject.
>>
>> We have precedent that entire classes and types of things are
>> out of scope.
>
> Where is that written down? What classes and types of things have been
> declared out of scope?
For example things that I immediately remember
- fictional objects
- blatantly subjective things like reviews, ratings
- mapping of private objects (location of my bed)
- mapping of moving objects (location of myself or a moving ship or
plane)
- completely gone objects (for railways the question is when railway is
fully gone)
- personal detail (ties into subjective ones) like "my favorite trees",
or "towns I visited"
- objects on Moon/Mars and other locations outside Earth
Objects with these characteristics cannot be (easily) identified in the
data - they would need a human to judge on a case-by-case basis (except
for the extra-terrestrial things, but you might have trouble defining
their location in terms of WGS84 lat/lon anyway...)
Subjective data is by definition not independently verifiable, so that
can go. Ratings are sometimes awarded by a recognised body (rather than
by customers), and those ratings would IMHO qualify as independently
verifiable.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
