On 7/7/23 16:59, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote:
Sounds like a reasonable take that reflects the reality of a
human-centered project where we make decisions based on community
consensus and generally being reasonable people rather than creating
bureaucratic processes. The purpose of wiki proposals are to define
what goes on the wiki, and as of July 2023, a recommendation that
importers socialize their proposed imports on the community forums is
sensible advice to place on the wiki.
While wiki votes are not perfect, they can serve as a litmus test to
understand whether vocal objectors might represent a meaningful
community faction or an outlier. The 50 contributors who voted on this
proposal are a tiny fraction of the "OSM Community." However, it's
quite a robust participation compared to most wiki votes and a very
healthy number compared to the small pool of contributors regularly
involved in online community discussions. It's nothing to scoff at.
All the public listings and posts were to get awareness about the issue,
and gauge the real community opinion on changing a requirement like
this. I bent the tagging proposal template to serve the goal of trying
to get a better understanding of what the community thinks, not to try
to cheat some existing rule. The vote was combined with announcements in
other communication channels (slack, forum, this list, etc.) to try to
get the fullest opinion reasonably possible by involved community
members. I don't think the way the proposals template was used should be
a nitpick focused upon, when the only purpose was to attempt to measure
public view on an issue.
That said, if anyone feels that their voice wasn't heard and/or that
this proposal hasn't had a sufficient review, I would 100% support
anyone who wishes to pose a revised timeline for more substantial
review and consideration, including from the DWG or any dissenter. I
don't speak for James, of course, but as he is one of the more
prolific importers in the United States (with strong community support
for his efforts to map Florida land cover), I suspect he would also
welcome additional participation to further study, refine, and
document best practices for importing as we understand them in 2023.
Like I said before, the goal is to get the community's opinion on the
use of the community forums over the mailing list for imports. I'd be
happy to hear from anyone who didn't participate in the vote or in
previous discussions.
Thanks,
--James
_______________________________________________
Imports mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
