There are multiple aspects to this, so we can see how far the rabbit hole we want to go.
The first is that OpenStreetMap is very collaborative. The basic tradeoff is this: in exchange for the detailed information we provide, they provide the development, server time, editing tools, and agreements with the imagery companies to allow us to use the data to map golf courses. This is a collaborative, best effort.
You'll probably see the most conflicts between our designers and Joe Mapper right now, because it's new for us and we're excited and editing a lot of courses. 99.9% of golf courses are clean slates, and the others are probably personal or famous courses. Just like Wikipedia, there may be trolls who have nothing better to do than to protect their little chunk of map.
My suggested approach for this to to just make a new post here and let me look at what the situation is. I try to work the system and make it so that what's best for us is the guidelines OSM specifies. I've added features and defined standards, so I can document/help resolve any conflicts.
The second best approach is to message the other editor on OSM and try to reach an agreement. If they 100% want the original bunkering as it was back in Bobby Jones's time and won't budge, maybe there's a compromise you can reach.
-------------------------------------
The only technical solution I can offer, if it's desperately needed, is I can add complicate the workflow by allowing you to import a .osm file (as if you were making a flat course), but allow you to do so instead of reading the live data from OSM. This would let you 'snapshot' your work when you're finished and not worry about others changing it in the future (which is VERY unlikely for any non-tour or famous course, but I understand that our best designers want the best courses).
I believe OSM is also completely iterative, so no information is ever lost, just not shown. It's likely possible that you can go back in time in the edit history and find the point where you left off and there might be some recovery options there.
-------------------------------------
If someone can find other developers to contribute there's many other ways that this could be done. You could re-write your own mapping script and when lidar data has intensity, you could outline directly on the mask or by creating a higher resolution visual mask. OSM and it's tool can't be packaged for offline use, but it wouldn't be impossible for a developer to copy the system into a different UI. Unfortunately, developers are rare and expensive and I'm nearing the end of how far I as one person can push the project.
-------------------------------------
Longer term,
Doyley can decide if his team can support buying infrastructure and creating their own instance of OpenStreetMap. OpenStreetMap, like all open source projects - even my lidar tool itself - can be freely forked and developed in parallel for those who want to do things their own way.
You would lose access to the sat images though and would need to pay to source those. BUT there is a twist:
Since you can license the data as you see fit, you could negotiate a license with Google to use the maps, but Google will make you pay for that. I can't give an exact price, but I would guess it would cost between $400-$1000 / year to license just the Google portion of the maps and the output data would not be able to be shared to the OpenStreetMap community or used for any other purpose.
Actually, maybe it would be free-ish, they might offer a $200/month credit?
cloud.google.com/maps-platform/pricing/sheet/But even once that's done, for the equivalent of taking your toys and going home, you'd still need IT support and someone experienced in running a multimedia service and willing to pay for it.
International Record: 7-0-0
