Your remark seems reasonable ;) Thing is: this is not meant as a bot, so the usual caveats apply. It just serves as a highlight of "something might be wrong here", like so many QA tools do. What the user wielding the QA tool does with that is his choice. Does he automatically correct it? Wrong for OSM standards, but who is going to stop him. Just like who is stopping anyone using a QA tool and armchairmapping something that he really can not see from a distance.
Regards, Maarten > Op 28-11-2022 14:15 CET schreef stevea <stevea...@softworkers.com>: > > > See, saying “seems reasonable” actually seems reasonable, until one realizes > one doesn’t truly know. Ask yourself if others in OSM would agree if “seems > reasonable” is good enough to meet OSM’s criteria for data entry: you’ll get > mixed answers, though a sizable number will say “not really good enough.” > You might even have a very high degree of confidence…though, ask yourself if > you want to navigate (or otherwise rely upon) a map with what amounts to > guesswork. That’s how the camel’s nose (of creeping errors, one datum at a > time) gets into the tent (map). I mean no disrespect to camels. > > I have decades of experience in software quality assurance at top companies > (Apple, Adobe…), so I have great respect for Lukas’ tool finding / > identifying errors (emphasis on those verbs), it’s what is done after that > which matters. Guesswork? Mmm, no, I’d prefer not. Our usual “on the > ground verify” (or otherwise equivalent, like “I already know that”) > criteria: yes, much better. > > We’re not quibbling (slightly objecting to trivial matters) here: these are > fundamental decisions each and every mapper makes as they enter data into our > map database. I strive to keep that quality as high as I possibly can, > though everything I say here is simply one person’t opinion. Let’s be > careful with power tools: they’re great at finding / identifying errors, > whether they can “fix” the data after that must be carefully considered > case-by-case. > > > On Nov 28, 2022, at 12:44 AM, Marc_marc <marc_m...@mailo.com> wrote: > > Le 28.11.22 à 00:43, Dave F via talk a écrit : > >> a "high confidence" interpolation, from an armchair or anywhere, will lead > >> to inaccurate data being added to the OSM database. > > > > if you have a road in 3 segments A B C and A+C have the ssame name, > > then not only does it seem reasonable to me to add the name on B > > but also the reply "do a survey" is a dogmatic answer: the ground > > does not contain a sign every time osm cuts a way because of a change > > in the number of strips for example. > > So by survey, you will be reduced to deducing that a segment between > > 2 others with the same name, probably also has the same name > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
