On 31 July 2010 02:03, Richard Weait <rich...@weait.com> wrote: > John Smith, your method stinks.
What stinks specifically, you even seem to agree in your next paragraph. > You seem to believe that your preferred tag of emergency=fire_station, > etc is better. Rather than adding your preferred tags and allowing the > community to eventually realize that you are correct, you have > _replaced_ many of these tags with your preferred tag. I haven't replaced anything, apart cleaning up amenity=ambulance, amenity=Ambulance, amenity=ambulance_station and amenity=Ambulance_station -> emergency=ambulance_station, of which there was only 100 or so tagged. > OSMDoc says there were ~25,000 amenity=fire_station last November. > http://osmdoc.com/en/tag/amenity/#values Which I haven't touched... at all, so before accusing someone of something at least see if they actually did what they've been accused of, I'm proposing a change and was asking for comments. > Your disdain for clueful change set comments appears to be nothing > more than obfuscation. I don't seem to be the only one in this boat that finds changeset comments less than useful to describe disparate changes, or prevent misleading ones, which have occurred in the past by accident, why can't there be better tools to summarise or model changes, why can't I see a before and after image of the map based on what changed, why must it all come down to 1 or 2 lines of comment that may or may not actually reflect the changes made? > How is the OpenStreetMap community to distinguish these edits from > vandalism, and you from a vandal? Considering I didn't make any of the changes you are accusing me of I fail to see the problem. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
