the CHURCH institute's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 31142028 | as for the voting - it read like a WIKI inclusionist vs exclusionist debate |
|
| 31142028 | understood - never saw a posted speed on that "road" but I get the rules, simply didn't feel it was practical application and if OSM was on it they would question it being a road - put it this way if a wagonpath was zero and an alleyway was a 10 - and Kiger which we updated earlier was a 4 this would be a 5 |
|
| 31142028 | don't know if any speed is posted - simply know that travel is very slow and bumpy - it is a dirt covered road that acts more like an access way to the creek it borders - there are no structures on it except as you approach the very western end past the bridge - again not something that would be a navigational road |
|
| 31139559 | hear you and yes, I have put in map requests with Google on these miss labeled features - with over a decade of GIS under my belt, I have seen past updates get purged with database update (GDT/ESRI) were notorious for it - regional based corrections have always been a better solution to capturing the nuances lost by current heads up digitizing |
|
| 31140891 | it is an unpaved roadway not even used by locals - dirt bikes and people dumping along the road are the primary travelers (again another roadway truckers get hung up on) |
|
| 31139559 | this seems counterintuative to road navigation - we have actually had truck drivers on this driveway |