Categories to be Restored - Issue 601

[rjhintz]

It would be great if more people voted for issue 601, which asks that
categories that were removed be restored. So far just 15 people have
said this is important, which seems odd if one looks at the list of
categories that are in 601.

It would be even better if the status was changed from "New" to
"Accepted," since I think that's the general expectation of those of
us in user land.
--
Rich

[rjhintz]

Anything going on with this? It's still not showing even as
Accepted. Can it be changed to High priority?
--
Rich

On Apr 2, 12:04 pm, rjhintz <rjhi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It would be great if more people voted for issue601, which asks that

> categories that were removed be restored.  So far just 15 people have
> said this is important, which seems odd if one looks at the list of
> categories that are in601.
>
> It would be even better if the status was changed from "New" to
> "Accepted," since I think that's the general expectation of those of
> us in user land.
> --
> Rich

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Issues & troubleshooting" group.
To post to this group, send email to map-troub...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to map-troubleshoo...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/map-troubleshooting?hl=en.

[rjhintz]

Bump

On Apr 2, 12:04 pm, rjhintz <rjhi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It would be great if more people voted for issue601, which asks that

> categories that were removed be restored.  So far just 15 people have
> said this is important, which seems odd if one looks at the list of
> categories that are in601.
>
> It would be even better if the status was changed from "New" to
> "Accepted," since I think that's the general expectation of those of
> us in user land.
> --
> Rich

[rjh...@gmail.com]

This issue is  *still* not Accepted, much less Fixed.  I'm told by Google staff that the issue tracker is reviewed regularly, but the status of this known problem as "New" doesn't seem to be consistent with that assertion.

[lasni...@google.com]

Hi Rich,

I've recently adopted this issue as my own personal AAAAAAGH! (non-technical term) and am pushing for more info and will post back here.

[rjhintz]

Once the old categories are restored, I strongly recommend that some
sub group of experienced mappers be formed as a workgroup to refine
the features, their organization, and any specific feature's
coordination with mapping authorities outside of GMM. For instance,
airfield features coordinated with ICAO. This might bring up the
layer discussion, but there's already a model in GEarth.
--
Rich

[CNR Nair]

Rich's proposal to get a feedback from a subgroup experienced mappers be formed as a work-group to refine

the features, their organization, and any specific feature's

coordination with mapping authorities outside of GMM is a good proposal.
Hope GMM will consider this.

Regards
CNR