On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 4:37 AM Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote:
> in the spirit of friendly collaboration I would say that a limited amount > of > stuff-that-should-not-be-in-OSM can be *tolerated*. If someone does a > lot of good work for OSM otherwise and would really like to record an > ancient former railroad that ran through where their house now sits - I > shrug and let them do it. In my experience, it is more often the opposite situation that happens. A mapper, unaware of the lengthy debates on the topic of former railroads, is mapping her house and removes the bit of abandoned rail currently on the map in that spot, assuming it is a data error or poor import. After all. she's quite aware that there is a house and not a railway at that location as she has personally surveyed it. Sometime later, an abandoned railway enthusiast comes along and angrily harasses the mapper for removing the bit of railway that quite rightly isn't there. It's been my experience that allowing enthusiasts to map phantom railways causes far more grief and contention between mappers than simply drawing a line and saying "we don't map things that aren't there."
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
