Hi, > No, but the argument is actually that if it's too complicated for > potlatch then it's too complicated full-stop. If only experts end up > being able to do something then in general it won't get done. That > might be OK for the bits where there are experts, but most areas on > our map have never had an expert anywhere near them. We want cyclists, > walkers, business owners etc mapping
Agree; > not computer geeks Why don't we want them too? The fact is, even if it may not be en-vogue to say, making a good map requires a hell of a lot of experience and training and advanced tools. The army of schoolkids will help us tremendously, but we will need people with an eye for detail to polish it up. Some areas on our map have moved past the stage where we could actually use an army of schoolkids - they are now where we want to encourage people to enter stuff like turn restrictions, or the information that certain roads actually share one bridge instead of running over parallel bridges, or certain buidlings actually form one big entity together, etc.; this can only be done with relations, and we have to give these people the proper tools for the job. Yes, it IS complicated, but it is a complicated matter, what did you expect? The alternative is saying that anything we can't do with a limited toolset we just don't do. That is a strategic discussion we should perhaps have at some point, but currently my opinion is that I don't want to say "no, we don't do <complex cartography feature X> in OSM, it requires too much expertise when entering." Leaving anything that cannot be done by an army of schoolkids to the competition is a very bad idea in my eyes. Asking the army of schoolkids to enter complex relationships is a bad idea as well. Dropping support for complex concepts because the army of schoolchildren doesn't understand it anyway is... of course also a bad idea. > Ofcourse making relations ordered arguably isn't really that > complicated, and in itself it isn't, except that relations are already > extremely complicated for the average user. The more levels of > indirection and rules we add the worse it gets and the steeper the > learning curve becomes. True. By making relations ordered, I believe you can save some otherwise-needed extra indirection. > And having a mixed set of editors, ones that support ordering, and > ones that don't, are likely to cause more confusion. It's going to straighten out eventually. We don't have a requirement to be done by a certain day. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00.09' E008°23.33' _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
