Jun 2, 2020, 03:52 by c933...@gmail.com: > > > 在 2020年6月2日週二 09:26，Warin <> 61sundow...@gmail.com> > 寫道： > >> On 30/5/20 12:48 am, Volker Schmidt wrote: >> > My main point is that out there are things that consist of visible >> > objects plus objects which have left visible traces, and also some >> > pieces that have been completely erased, but of which we have >> > documented knowledge of where they once were. The entire thing makes >> > sense only with all its parts. These things be of interest for some >> > end users of OSM data, and hence, if someone has gone to the length of >> > mapping them, should find space in OSM. >> > In my view a general rule that any mapper can erase any object from >> > the map, when he does not see any trace of it, is certainly not >> > correct , he may be removing parts of the thing thsat only with all >> > its partsmakes sense. >> >> >> Where an old railway line has been built over by houses, factories, >> shops and roads I see no reason to retain the (historical) information >> in OSM. >> >> The old railway station that still exists at one end - yes, but where >> there is nothing, not even a hint, left then no. >> > > Except, it is relatively common for traces of old railway remain visible even > after new development (e.g. house, factory, shop, road) have been made on top > of their original site. So that cabnot be used as a criteria to determine > whether that should be removed or not although the exact situation varies a > lot in each individual cases. > Can you give an example (photos) where entire factory was constructed over former railway and this section of railway remains somehow mappable in OSM? With road I can easily imagine this, with a single small building I can also imagine special cases of this remaining true. But entire factory?
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
