----- Original Message -----
From: "Lucas Nussbaum" <lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net>
To: "sly (sylvain letuffe)" <li...@letuffe.org>
Cc: <talk@openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 5:59 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Import guidelines proposal update
On 19/09/12 at 16:24 +0200, sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote:
Hi,
I've read the rather long thread "Import guidelines & OSMF/DWG
governance" and
^^^^^^^^^^
Note that the use of the term "guidelines" is problematic by itself.
Either they are *guidelines*, that is, things that people SHOULD follow,
but it's OK (but not recommended) not to follow them.
Or they are *rules*, that is, things that people MUST follow.
Yes , except for the fact that some of the parts of that part do seem to
relate to "guidelines", Therefore I suggest :
1) Page Title "Import/Guidelines" this should be changed to
"Import/Guidelines and Mandatory Requirements"
2) Opening sentences be reworded. The current use of phrases such as "there
are few hard and fast rules", "all this is open to discussion" could suggest
that the text on the rest of the page are mere suggestions, rather than hard
and fast rules.
3) be clear on the page which bits are "guidance" and which bits are
"mandatory requirements"
David
If the DWG blocks accounts based on *guidelines*, I think that they
should
be renamed to *rules*.
Lucas
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
