On Mon, 09 Jan 2023 08:21:42 -0500 Greg Troxel <g...@lexort.com> wrote:
>Sören Reinecke <valin...@gmx.net> writes: > >> Using osm id is far from ideal but it is sufficient enough. If POI >> owners are using OSM data, they will likely also pay attention to the >> osm entry they have to keep it updated. So they will notice any >> change. > >You seem unwilling to understand that defining a way to refer to ids >will cause social pressure not to change ids, and that this harms the >community. How would it harm the community? Actually I would welcome a little social pressure to preserve objects when (and only when) it is possible and it makes sense I sometimes do get annoyed at especially new mappers that often excessively delete and recreates objects. Because it obscures the history. And id's are never changed. They just might represent objects that have been deleted. If an application receives such a geo:osmid it could choose to show a "removed" icon at last position of the object before deletion. It could also show the message of the changeset, where the object was deleted. That might cause a social pressure for better commit messages. Giving the recipient the last position of a deleted object would be at least as helpful as the alternative which is that the sender had used a position from some point in the objects lifetime. A bigger problem would be when an object is not deleted when it should have been, i.e., when an id is reused to represent something different in the real world. For example if a restaurant burns down and the area is used for a parking lot, it would be best to delete the restaurant and create a new object for the parking lot. Or someone could know that e.g., a restaurant had closed in Copenhagen and that a new traffic light was installed in Berlin and decide to use the same object, replace all the tags in the restaurant object and change the position. That would be confusing. But very rare, and I think that we should discourage such a style of editing. I believe that it useful to consider object identity, even if can turn into philosophy discussions. For example restaurant Koks, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1228100335 is temporarily relocated to Greenland https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1228100335 Is that the same restaurant? Should I just fix the coordinates? >Therefore it is not ok to do it. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
