Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Note 1000000

2017-05-27 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer 
2017-05-27 0:12 GMT+02:00 Nicolás Alvarez :

> The map should say "report a problem", not "add a note".




+1, I agree with this part. It really happens not too rarely that people
use the "notes" system for their personal notes (like "John's hotel").
Rather than "problem reports" they could also be called "remarks" or
something like this.

Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Note 1000000

2017-05-26 Thread Paul Johnson 
On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Dave F 
wrote:

>
> On 26/05/2017 14:43, Florian Lohoff wrote:
>
>>
>> Instead of complaining and continuing the bullshit - close it? Its a
>> single click - easy as it is ...  We want the feedback and the barrier
>> should be low - accept a bad signal to noise ratio - dont take notes
>> with a number as serious ...
>>
>
> You still don't get it. it's not just one note. The noise is oppressive.
> Why be against fixing something which really doesn't work as originally
> intended?
>

I'm not without the opinion that third-party clients shouldn't at least
recommend that they get an OSM account so they can get feedback and
notifications.  However, I do object to the idea that OSM notes are
"noisy".  Anonymous notes that don't make sense and can't be easily
surveyed by any known active mapper should be closed outright due to the
lack of constructive feedback; for the same reasons that Mapdust sucked.

That said, non-anonymous notes should be worked if possible, and if not,
commentary is especially welcome.  I do, literally, have thousands of notes
open, but I am also happy to answer questions, for example.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Note 1000000

2017-05-25 Thread Paul Johnson 
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Dave F  wrote:

> Yeah, but how many of them are useful? I spend far too much of my OSM time
> mopping up irrelevant, out of date & inaccurate info. Many notes are
> indicating locations which already exist such as building names & parks.
> What devices are being used which don't display this clearly?
>

Well, Mr. Neis says this...

*OSM Notes: *Closed with comment 1287 (w/o 5586), commented 409 and 7830
opened

So, I'd say north of 7500.  I'm still working on cleaning up after myself
since I *prolifically* road tripped the first half of this decade, mostly
in the southern plains.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Note 1000000

2017-05-25 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer 


sent from a phone

> On 25. May 2017, at 22:17, Dave F  wrote:
> 
> Many notes are indicating locations which already exist such as building 
> names & parks. What devices are being used which don't display this clearly?


some app has put a note on every amenity=parking object around here (and 
probably not only) which didn't have a fee and access tags. That contributed as 
well to the million ;-)

cheers,
Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] OSM Note 1000000

2017-05-25 Thread Dave F 
Yeah, but how many of them are useful? I spend far too much of my OSM 
time mopping up irrelevant, out of date & inaccurate info. Many notes 
are indicating locations which already exist such as building names & 
parks. What devices are being used which don't display this clearly?


I wish I could be more positive.

DaveF

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk