Organic Maps
Replies: 2 comments 2 replies
-
|
Even by confirming that the poi is still there you can not guarantee that it will disappear tomorrow. If there is a poi, you add it or don't touch it. If it's absent, you delete it. What are pros of a more complex approach you're offering? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
First of all, I totally agree with you; if it isnt on the map you add it, if it isnt their on the ground you delete it. But not all OM user use this function (although its a low barrier). So this approach, if implemented in a simple way (only one click), could even reach more OM users. But what would it bring then? I think this approach would offer more knowledge to the end user. It adds hugely to the accuracy of the map, in the sense that I know that the information is up to date. Let me give an example (which I come across all of Europe): Another case would be with small supermarkets. They go and come very quickly. Now I normally check Google Maps to see when a last review was written, because it indicates that someone was there and the store probably is there. I think one could also see it as a very fundamental way of reviewing integrated in the OSM environment, on which there is often discussion in the OSM/OM community. It enables to add more up to date information to a POI. As a reviewing option it is very basic, but could grow to something bigger |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Storing the info when the feature was created or edited is a big overhead to the data size. It is also not always consistent, because many features are edited from home. FYI, we want to display and allow users to add/edit OSM The out-of-date problem is fundamental, and it can be solved only if it will be very easy for users to add/edit/remove features. Instead of discussing the "it is still there" button, let's focus on a better UX for "it's not there" or "it changed". It will make the world better sooner ) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Related, it would be a good idea to show "when was the POI last confirmed to exist" by surfacing check_date and check_date:opening_hours That would make it more reliable to use the POI information Also seems like there are related tags with similar information (source:date and survey:date) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hi all!
As an outdoor enthousiast I am very happy with OM! I use it especially while hiking, also in remote areas. While in the outdoors, I highly depend on watersources. OM is a great way to find them, however the OSM data is not always very accurate (especially in remote places where not so many people go). So it happens sometimes that a watersource is actually not there anymore. Most of the times I try to verify the watersources by checking other information sources beforehand. However, I think there could be an opportunity to improve OM in this respect.
Now there is an option to delete or add a POI. I think it would be great added value to know when someone passed a POI for the last time and confirmed it is still there. The OSM tag ' check_date ' would probably be appropriate for this.
So this is what I am thinking: press a POI, then it shows 'edit place' (so far nothing new) and below that something like 'confirm that this place is here' which would than at the check_date in OSM and ofcourse show this date in OM.
It is a very rough idea and probably will not work with all POI and I guess there are some issues with OSM implementation, but still I think it could be valuable.
What do you think?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions