On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 1:07 AM, Steve Bennett <stevag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> > wrote: > > This leads to a situation where a mapper is expected to, as he or she > walks > > the streets, update every object in the database with "yep, this is still > > there, I walked past it right now".... > > > I know it's a slippery slope argument, and you're only proposing to do > this > > for a narrow subset of things - I just wanted to point out that > > "verification mapping" is not something we do currently. > There is no obligation implied on the part of *anyone else* to participate. I helped a group release an application to map drinking water sources. And indeed hundreds of people changed nothing but "Working=*unknown*" to "Working=*yes/no/needs repair*". The comments were generally useful as well. --- Note that shops rarely re-open in the same location after pulling out: I would "*disuse:shop*" those until a new tenant arrives. But broken infrastructure generally does get fixed, which is the focus of the *operational_status* tag. Broken infrastructure is still physically present, verifiable, and potentially useful. Given a choice between a reported working toilet, and a reported broken toilet, I'd head for the working one. But given no choice I'd try the reported broken one, and if I found it operational I'd be willing to update the status.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
