You are welcome. Doing otherwise, at least if done at scale, would greatly diminish the value of openstreetmap data for lots of consumers of that data.
So still eager to remove linear thoroughfares? Unlike what you pretend, plaza routing is not a solved issue. A bit I sympathize though: This reminds me of my local area, where there are lots of bare rock and scree and other such and paths mapped throughout where there are no paths on the ground, just terrain waiting to be conquered by people skilled in the art.
As you can see I might as well be drunk because I can’t really see on the screen what I’m mapping in the first place. I guess they just don’t make clear enough aerial imagery in this part of the world. Must be due to defense reasons.
I just don’t get what they mean by “go out and map”…
So I’m guessing the whole Openstreetmap things started England where you got
good aerial imagery in the first place, and
winter imagery with no vegetation blocking the view.
and maybe no matter what imagery you pick, they are actually aligned, with each other at least.
I assume you visited the place in-person to verify what the blurry blobs actually are? If so, I think that’s a great contribution!
Even if the locations aren’t accurate down to the meter, knowing that one corner of the park contains drinking water (for example) is very useful to have on the map.
I just wanted to highlight this, as it is the metric by which I guide myself when putting something on the map or not: is it of use to someone?
If a thing is there, in the real world, this doesn’t automatically justify it being put on the map. I get that some people want to be as accurate (or better said, detailed) as possible (because it’s their nature), but in the end, every shape that ends up in the database makes it larger and harder to work with. And I think we should all keep this in mind: accuracy is not free.
Even if we could use it, it’s not necessarily accurate. The aerial stuff near me is out of date enough that some major road changes aren’t reflected in the satelite views. The ESRI aerial views may be blurrier but they’re more recent (at least for my neighborhood) — YMMV.
I am a hiker, cyclist, car driver. These roles have different needs what gets mapped, how detailed the map should be, and how accurate it should be, ideally. E.g. for hiking, the width, position and presence of a handrail of a tiny bridge, or the presence of a stile with permissive access can be important; it could determine my route for that day and where I require a place to sleep. The presence and width of a grass verge along a busy motorway, nice to know when you’ve hiked a day, it’s getting dark, check-in time is near, and you are faced with a choice: walk 5 more miles of mountainous path or take the shortcut along the motorway. If only I could have seen that on the map…
For all my roles, recognition of real objects on the map varies from nice to essential. Accuracy also varies from nice to essential. And sure, many details are not important to me, and I often do not require high accurancy, but I am sure other users find those things important in their roles.
I feel this is directed at my post, so I’m using the opportunity to add a scenario I was thinking of and forgot to mention (regarding usefulness and micromapping): some people are perfectionists, others just use the map as a canvas for their “art”.
I found features using hundred of points (think road bends, junctions, buildings) just to achieve that “perfect look”, where only tens would have been enough. Or maybe trees drawn one by one, where their sole purpose is to make the area look good. Are these useful? Don’t think so… they’re way too detailed and can’t say about accuracy (but I bet the one drawing the trees hasn’t been with a GPS receiver next to each tree to make sure it’s in the right position). I, personally, try to simplify things wherever possible, without sacrificing data, so that the map doesn’t get cluttered needlessly.
As for your response, I totally agree with you that different people have different uses for data and sometimes we don’t see the value (e.g. I wouldn’t have considered the position of the handrail useful).
