4 ms·
> I'm saying that OSM data is objectively better for the rural parts of the world I've been to. Which is a subjective factor. "X is objectively better for the
by ucaetano 8y ago
> I'm saying that OSM data is objectively better for the rural parts of the world I've been to.
Which is a subjective factor. "X is objectively better for the categories that I subjectively selected".
Mapping is a subjective topic, simply because there are endless ways to evaluate and compare maps, so attributing any type of weight to any factor is a subjective exercise based on your own personal preferences.
- another-cuppa 8y agoWhat's your reason for thinking Google is the best then? Do you even use maps for anything except major highways?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- nickysielicki 8y agoI'll agree that what layers a map ought to show is a subjective matter. But if you have two maps and they both have a shared subset of layers, you can (for that subset) objectively evaluate which map more accurately represents the real world, eg: has more objects than the other map, and/or has objects marked more accurately. And what I'm saying is that for the layers that they have in common, I think OSM wins hands down.
- skybrian 8y agoThe place where you live and the places you happen to visit is a subjective factor. Other people (who visit other places) might have a different overall experience, even if you'd agree with them on any place you both visited.