On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote: > The only advantage i see is from the wikidata side that the > responsibility of dealing with a data change is superficially delegated > to the mapper in OSM with wikidata tags but it is an illusion that this > will actually lead to reliable ID maintainance since ultimately this is > something you cannot require the mapper to do because it is > non-verifiable information. OSM recruits mappers to map the verifiable > world, we do not require them to also research secondary source > references in wikidata to make sure they correctly maintain wikidata > IDs.
Well, I certainly haven't tried to maintain them, but I encounter them on objects. That's usually because I've worked with the boundaries of a park, add a Wikipedia link, and find that Wikidata gnomes come after me and add a Wikidata link with it.. If the gnomes are going to add wikidata=Q314159265 to some object. I'll happily give them an Overpass query to retrieve that object (any any object tagged alike). If the gnomes are going to ask me to map things that I can't see in the field (or do a quick search for: I do like to link to parks' Web pages and Wikipedia articles), that becomes unreasonable. If someone else wants to maintain data on objects that I mapped, fine. I'll happily give them back what they gave me. If someone expects me to add facts that I don't know, according to a schema that I don't understand, sorry, I won't do that. Since I can't give someone a stable key to look up an object that they want to remember, the best I can do is let them hang their own key on it, and give it back to them. You think it's worthless because it isn't perfect. I think it's better than nothing. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
