What about when an object (perhaps a road or a boundary) is replaced by a better approximation? The history of the database objects is already dealt with (you can access old versions and see when it was deleted). Typically in these cases the new version gets drawn/uploaded, the tags are copied over and the old version is deleted. So there will be an ongoing need for a delete button. Maybe your suggestion would be well supported by a "clone POI" operation, which creates a duplicate of the selected POI and deletes the old version with one click of the mouse?
Colin On 2013-08-24 10:13, Lester Caine wrote: > Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > >>> Sometimes it almost looks like some people here are afraid of new users. +1 >>> We also have to see "deletions" as positive contributions "a priori" when >>> it is really fixing something (e.g. removing an obsolete POI). Only >>> intentional deletions are positive contributions. There are "mouse mistake" >>> deletions. And "haste" deletions. All I ask is that before deleting a POI, >>> that you (beginner, intermediate or guru) examine it. Can it be fixed? >>> Should it be disused: instead? There are few POIs that can be reasonably >>> deleted from the geometry alone... which is why I feel putting the trash >>> can in the editing area is poor workflow. Instead set the UI up to >>> encourage good workflow: see a POI that might be bad, examine it's current >>> content and/or history, apply local knowledge and/or research, and then >>> execute a course of action. Respect the prior mapper's work by actually >>> looking at it, prior to deleting it. > > Until such time as we have a properly documented workflow which archives > 'obsolete POI' to an historic map database, they should remain on the map, > with > an end date. OK the history retains when an action as taken, but the > important > missing information here is 'closed down xxx' otherwise one does not know if > an > item was removed because it was wrong or for some legitimate reason. So to my > mind there should NEVER be a trash can - 'archive' with properly added tags > is > the only correct work flow!
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
