Frederik Ramm <[email protected]> writes:

> It seems that JOSM was used for uploading this, and today's JOSM
> validator would have spotted the problem (it reports 9 duplicated
> ways, 122 ways with same position, 287 self-intersecting ways and many
> more), but it is possible that back in 2011 when this was made, the
> validator was less advanced or more easily overlooked.

Is there an easy way to run the validator in batch mode, so that one
could do something like

  josm foo.osm --batch-validate

and get a foo.validation.txt file that has a report of troubles?

> When thinking about improved import guidelines, maybe we should not
> only request that people publish what they want to import, we should
> also ask for one or two mappers with a certain track record to
> "second" the import, something like "I have examined the proposed data
> and I think it is fit for uploading, signed, John Doe". If there is an
> imports group like the one that Serge is setting up in the US, that
> group would routinely "sign off" an import like that, but anyone else
> who knows what they're soing could do so too.

That makes sense to me, but I'd add (probably you intended this) that
From a community-building viewpoint, people who do that kind of review
should either say "it's ok" or send a message to imports@ with an
explanation of how it's not ok.  This is really just applying normal the
code review process to data, with the intent of getting it to the
acceptable state.

Attachment: pgpRw91V4_cQi.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Imports mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports

Reply via email to