john whelan wrote: > When you get to a certain size you need a formal review process > before making changes and I think HOT is now at that size.
Which is not at all relevant as iD is not a HOT project. OSM empowers its developers to make decisions: on openstreetmap-carto, iD, JOSM, osm.org, osm2pgsql, you name it. Most developers welcome feedback, but consensus cannot always be reached, as per the recent changes to osm-carto. The idea that you might impose a formal review process to tell non-HOT developers what to do is absolutely anathema to OSM and I think would lead to a mass walkout of developers. If you want a humanitarian-focused editor or just a humanitarian-focused set of presets, then you should host an instance of iD on hotosm.org. Otherwise, you have to accept that changes will be made. > Most sane people think in terms of moving mappers to JOSM eventually Nice insult. Actually http://www.mdpi.com/2220-9964/5/2/21/htm, published a fortnight ago, shows that the picture is more varied than you might think. France is 84% JOSM vs 9% Potlatch, while the UK is 47% Potlatch vs 42% JOSM. Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Difficulty-in-communicating-with-iD-users-tp5869083p5869115.html Sent from the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap (HOT) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
