de/NRW: Orthophoto is best, vDOP is not #2288
Conversation
resolves osmlab#2262 resolves osmlab#2273
|
@grischard you reviewed an merged #2277 so quickly that I hope you might have time to look at this as well. |
| @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ | |||
| "id": "nrw_ortho_wms", | |||
| "description": "RGB-/Colorbild - Normale farbliche Darstellung.", | |||
| "country_code": "DE", | |||
| "best": false, | |||
| "best": true, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| "best": true, | |
| "best": false, |
How do you define "best"?
For half of NRW currently the nrw_idop_wms imagery (green area on the following screenshot) is more recent (~ 1 year) than nrw_ortho_wms (blue area).
So maybe don't assign "best" to any source here.
See also
#2022 (comment)
#2273 (comment)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Something that is missing cannot be "best". If multiple are present, then "best" is the most useful in terms of quality and currentness.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Something that is missing cannot be "best".
Others might argue:
- Something that is not the most recent cannot be "best".
- Something that has not the best resolution cannot be "best".
Until there is a clear definition/rule for "best" based on consensus, this is a never ending game.
As mentioned in #2273 (comment):
Given the lack of a clear definition for what is "best", I currently won't assign "best" to any of the three sources.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't see any need to open a policy debate over the attribute. Nor do I see any reason to decide anything for eternity. Surely one can simply update the data, when imagery changes again in the future.
This PR merely compares dop and vdop, where clearly vdop is mostly empty. I would think vdop is clearly less valuable than dop at this moment. When it did have imagery, it was blurrier than dop too, so it was "better" in terms of age but not in terms of (optical) resolution.
This PR does not concern itself with idop, so please discuss that elsewhere. Do not use it to delay this PR. If you want idop to be featured/"best", you'd have to keep its bounds fresh on an almost daily basis... and that is not considering how long it might take for any commit here to become effective in osm.org/edit
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't like the tone in whole parts of this discussion.
This PR does not concern itself with idop, so please discuss that elsewhere.
IMHO you can't discuss this matter entirely without taking idop into account.
Do not use it to delay this PR.
It's not my intention to delay this PR. I was asked by @tordans in #2273 (comment) for my opinion.
As mentioned in #2273 (comment):
"I don't have a strong opinion here, go with dop as best if you want."
resolves #2262
might not address #2273 because the outcome of that issue could be to remove the vDOP entry entirely