W dniu 28.04.2019 o 11:43, Joseph Eisenberg pisze: > "Linear ways and areas can be non-verifiable if the geometry cannot be > demonstrated to be true or false by another mapper.
It sounds like for some reason nodes are more verifiable. I believe this does not work that way. I see an assumption that verification is easy: you should just ask local "where is it?" or "what is the name of this?", then you get the simple answer (presumably "here" for some node) and act accordingly. But this lacks some other important questions. The most basic question could be "is it a point?" - and for many objects you will hear it's not (at least the true/false category applies here the best). You can ask then "what borders does it have then?" and you will get some more complex (and I think more accurate) answer. I think there is a quite universal problem with mixing verifiability with level of accuracy. You might not be able to show accurate borders, but you can clearly verify that this is an area and not the node, for example. The bigger object, the more I think nodes are just "tagging for searching/rendering" etc. -- "I see dead people" [Sixth Sense] _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
