Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Please also have in mind the amount of traffic between plain text and html. I actually wonder how relevant this is. In general, I am a proponent of saving resources, so the less transmitted data the better. But with the increase of internet bandwidth and the speed of available hardware, the situation is not frozen. E.g. a good UI of a tool can reduce the time you actually need to spend looking at the screen, reducing the amount of energy your device consumes. Thus it may be beneficial to transmit larger chunks of data but show information in a well-formed way. Unless someone is still connected with a 56k modem and actually needs to wait to download data, I don't think the size is an issue. We are not tagging videos :) We did not talk about security issues and scripts, yet. Where do you see a potential problem in Loomio (or another similar tool) as compared to plain email? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
2015-03-23 10:50 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: accessibility sorry, /s/accessibility/diversity/ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: I agree that a 'forum' is far better at engaging a community ... keeps topics more organised as replies are localised (that are no isolated branches for instance), avoids the 'digest mode' problem, some even have a system of not viewing post by someone they don't like! It's 2015 and people still struggle with how threading and filters work? Just because someone couldn't pass a middle school basic computer skills course is no fault of the technology. Paul has just emphasized an important advantage of using mailing list as compared to forums or other moderated platforms: Anywhere else he would have just run the risk of being banned. An open mailing list is the most democratic discussion platform. KK. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Am 23.03.2015 um 09:53 schrieb Paul Johnson: On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: It is amazing to see how few people participate in this discussion and vote compared to the number of mappers. STOP USING MAILINGLISTS!!! Those things might be nice for some tech savy people, but for everybody else it's just as mess and feels like spam. Are you from the past? Email is the most basic service out there; don't expect it to go anywhere anytime soon. +1 as long as there is no alternative for offline support we need email. Please also have in mind the amount of traffic between plain text and html. We did not talk about security issues and scripts, yet. Cheers fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
I can't imagine that people who are able to provide mapping input for OSM are not able to work with forums etc. Moderation is something you have to agree upon before. The OSM community can decide not to moderate. On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 10:53 AM Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-23 10:43 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org: The mailing lists are moderated. they are moderately moderated, you have to act in a very asocial way to risk moderation, unless it's the accessibility list, maybe ;-) Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: I agree that a 'forum' is far better at engaging a community ... keeps topics more organised as replies are localised (that are no isolated branches for instance), avoids the 'digest mode' problem, some even have a system of not viewing post by someone they don't like! It's 2015 and people still struggle with how threading and filters work? Just because someone couldn't pass a middle school basic computer skills course is no fault of the technology. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de wrote: It is amazing to see how few people participate in this discussion and vote compared to the number of mappers. STOP USING MAILINGLISTS!!! Those things might be nice for some tech savy people, but for everybody else it's just as mess and feels like spam. Are you from the past? Email is the most basic service out there; don't expect it to go anywhere anytime soon. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
2015-03-23 10:43 GMT+01:00 Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org: The mailing lists are moderated. they are moderately moderated, you have to act in a very asocial way to risk moderation, unless it's the accessibility list, maybe ;-) Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:23 AM, Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: I agree that a 'forum' is far better at engaging a community ... keeps topics more organised as replies are localised (that are no isolated branches for instance), avoids the 'digest mode' problem, some even have a system of not viewing post by someone they don't like! It's 2015 and people still struggle with how threading and filters work? Just because someone couldn't pass a middle school basic computer skills course is no fault of the technology. Paul has just emphasized an important advantage of using mailing list as compared to forums or other moderated platforms: Anywhere else he would have just run the risk of being banned. An open mailing list is the most democratic discussion platform. The mailing lists are moderated. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Mon, 2015-03-23 at 15:04 +0100, fly wrote: as long as there is no alternative for offline support we need email. Fly, once registered as a Loomio user, you can still choose to receive and respond to email, maybe without ever actually logging into the Loomio interface again (?). Please also have in mind the amount of traffic between plain text and html. True, but perhaps made up for by not including long histories in each message. And the messages seem to be RFC compliant, no long lines for example ! We did not talk about security issues and scripts, yet. ?? David ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 18:23 +0100, Peter Wendorff wrote: ... sensible stuff about off line work... In an ideal world we would have one discussion platform that can be used by a mail client as well as by a web forum software. I don't know if anything like that exists, but basically it's the same concept, whether it's mail with reply-to headers or forum posts with some kind of a parent-post link. Indeed Peter, it looks like Loomio can do that. I registered for Loomio (using my google creds) and now get an email for every post. I can answer directly via the email or follow a link to Loomio. On the other hand, those wishing to see a reduction of incoming mail David regards Peter Am 19.03.2015 um 16:36 schrieb Jan van Bekkum: Correct, but the forums are easier to scan through and search, On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:26 PM Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org mailto:j...@liotier.org wrote: On 19/03/2015 15:42, Jan van Bekkum wrote: Proposal 7 - use a forum instead of 4 mailing lists and a wiki (was proposed earlier). Then you'll have 4 sub-forums and a wiki. _ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.__org/listinfo/tagging https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Hi, to mention a major drawback of a forum IMHO: I can read a mailinglist offline. Fetch mails to my notebook once, read and answer while being offline and sending mails from outgoing folder as one batch late when online again. With a forum I would have to open any unread thread beforehand, write my answer and leave the browser tab open to manually post later when online again. Therefore I prefer the mailing list for some usecases. As a second thing I think is a good thing that discussions can fork in several different directions - if done right. As long as it stays basically the same topic this is easy on mailinglists, while for switching the topic one is forced to decide between opening a new (disconnected) topic or staying below the old one, while a dual approach would be right (like starting a new thread while linking it to the initiating mail from the old one). At a Forum it's the same issue here, but easier to start a new thread and link to the old one than with mails. In an ideal world we would have one discussion platform that can be used by a mail client as well as by a web forum software. I don't know if anything like that exists, but basically it's the same concept, whether it's mail with reply-to headers or forum posts with some kind of a parent-post link. regards Peter Am 19.03.2015 um 16:36 schrieb Jan van Bekkum: Correct, but the forums are easier to scan through and search, On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:26 PM Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org mailto:j...@liotier.org wrote: On 19/03/2015 15:42, Jan van Bekkum wrote: Proposal 7 - use a forum instead of 4 mailing lists and a wiki (was proposed earlier). Then you'll have 4 sub-forums and a wiki. _ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.__org/listinfo/tagging https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
2015-03-18 21:05 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: Do we have abstention possible at all? The voting system currently only implements yes and no: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Vote. If we had abstention, I would have rather counted it as non-supporting. A proposal where people don't care or object is not a good one IMO. However, I wouldn't mind changing it, since, as it is, there would be no difference. To not re-vote this change, let's accept it first, and then we can improve it further. Yes, we do have abstentions, basically everything that is neither a yes nor a no is an abstention. I'd prefer to not count them as opposing, as they usually make comments like I don't care for voting or it doesn't matter to me, why should those count against a proposal (like it is now)? You chose your words cleverly, because I agree, they are also non-supporting, but still, you can't see them as objecting neither. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Dear all, We have enough support to change the current math and no dramatic opposition. I will do it in the wiki now. If you feel I haven't taken something critically important into account and this change is for the worse, not better, please roll back. The discussions on the more global change of the proposal/voting process and on how to carry out discussions goes on :) Cheers, Kotya On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: On 17.03.2015 15:04, Kotya Karapetyan wrote: I propose to clarify it by changing the recommended number of votes in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Approved_or_rejected from .../8 unanimous approval votes/ /or //15 total votes with a majority approval.../ to /...8 or more //unanimous approval votes or 10 or more total votes with more than 74 % approval...//./ This will not change anything in terms of the ongoing discussion of /how/ the approval influences other things. So the discussion can continue. But we'd introduce some mathematical logic in the process. +1 I think it's not ideal that this would make it easier to accept proposals with very few voters (e.g. a 8:2 majority), so I would prefer a higher quorum (e.g. 15). But in my opinion it's still acceptable, and better than no change. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
2015-03-19 11:37 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: Dear all, We have enough support to change the current math and no dramatic opposition. I will do it in the wiki now. FWIW, I didn't even count 8 positive votes that you said would be required when cast unanimously, but at least one clear opposition (Pieren) plus my comment that you couldn't change the rules this way. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
I didn't mean to break the rules :) I thought I did count 8 +1's, plus the discussion shifted to other topics, so no strong opposition was expressed. If Pieren and you really see more harm than improvement in what I've done, please feel free to roll back. I have a general impression that democracy should sometimes be a little helped by a strong opinion, when it minimizes damage. If you foresee a damage—feel free to undo. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-19 11:37 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: Dear all, We have enough support to change the current math and no dramatic opposition. I will do it in the wiki now. FWIW, I didn't even count 8 positive votes that you said would be required when cast unanimously, but at least one clear opposition (Pieren) plus my comment that you couldn't change the rules this way. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Martin, Though Bryce introduced the abstain option with a nice pictogram :) I don't remember seeing it used in any proposals. Therefore currently there is no mathematical difference. Therefore I suggest that you just change the rule from 74 % approval to not more than 25 % objection. Since we are in the process of discussing abandoning the approval process all together, we can revisit the numbers. But since you seem to have a strong opinion and sound reasoning, I'd just implement the change you suggest now and wait for someone to tell you why it's a bad idea. Cheers, Kotya On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-18 21:05 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: Do we have abstention possible at all? The voting system currently only implements yes and no: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Vote. If we had abstention, I would have rather counted it as non-supporting. A proposal where people don't care or object is not a good one IMO. However, I wouldn't mind changing it, since, as it is, there would be no difference. To not re-vote this change, let's accept it first, and then we can improve it further. Yes, we do have abstentions, basically everything that is neither a yes nor a no is an abstention. I'd prefer to not count them as opposing, as they usually make comments like I don't care for voting or it doesn't matter to me, why should those count against a proposal (like it is now)? You chose your words cleverly, because I agree, they are also non-supporting, but still, you can't see them as objecting neither. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
2015-03-19 12:00 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: I didn't mean to break the rules :) I thought I did count 8 +1's, plus the discussion shifted to other topics, so no strong opposition was expressed. Yes, I didn't presume you had been acting in bad faith, just some overeagerness, maybe ;-). Could be I've missed some positive votes when counting (voting and discussion mixed up in a mailing list thread is not very transparent). It just seemed a bit strange to me, that you rushed immediately at changing the wiki, after such a short time for discussion and just about reaching the minimum contribution. If Pieren and you really see more harm than improvement in what I've done, please feel free to roll back. The numbers don't matter much to me, I won't revert and can generally agree with raising the hurdle for approval, but I think this thread could also be seen as an opportunity to make a more fundamental change to the whole way tag proposals work in OSM. In the end I see the proposal process as a way to document the intended meaning of a tag. Whether that tags then gets approved by the community can be seen from mapper support (active use), which is a bit intertwined with editor support (presets) and rendering or other data consumer support (if the tag is about something interesting to someone and it is used, there will also be someone evaluating it sooner or later). I liked Freds idea of naming the amount of supporters and their names (might need some software support if the voting participation should explode in the future) instead of a simple approved, and liked also the idea of having the proposal pages always linked to the documentation pages and kept open with clear pro and con lists to be continuously amended. I also like the current concise key/tag definition pages (well, sometimes they are not concise, but then they fail somehow) to provide suitable mapper support at a glance (so please no abolishing of these pages in favour of just the proposal pages). These tag definition pages should be linked to the proposal pages (already done currently, but not always). Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
OK, is it fair to say any non specific vote, one that is neither a clear yes nor a clear no is 'informal', not counted. Such a vote was cast with the intention of it adding to neither yes nor no so we should observe the voter's wish. Note their opinion but not count an uncountable vote ? David On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 12:00 +0100, Kotya Karapetyan wrote: I didn't mean to break the rules :) I thought I did count 8 +1's, plus the discussion shifted to other topics, so no strong opposition was expressed. If Pieren and you really see more harm than improvement in what I've done, please feel free to roll back. I have a general impression that democracy should sometimes be a little helped by a strong opinion, when it minimizes damage. If you foresee a damage—feel free to undo. On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2015-03-19 11:37 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: Dear all, We have enough support to change the current math and no dramatic opposition. I will do it in the wiki now. FWIW, I didn't even count 8 positive votes that you said would be required when cast unanimously, but at least one clear opposition (Pieren) plus my comment that you couldn't change the rules this way. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Mar 19, 2015, at 9:00 AM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: +1 on the change to a 75% threshold for voting. Negativity indicates the proposal needs work. Those with trouble scanning mailing lists should look into threading options for their mail client, or read discussions on threaded archive servers. My issue with email lists is that for most emails I delete after reading. If at some time later, I come across a tagging situation that I recall being previously discussed I need to go into the mail archives at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo find the list (probably tagging but maybe others) and then find which month of which year it was discussed. Most forums I have seen and used have a much better search setup than that. Also, if I need or want to resurrect the thread, that it typically trivial on a forum as you just post a reply. But if I’ve pulled up the old thread out of the list archive I will have broken the message ID information in the email headers that make threading options on a mail reader work well. Cheers, Tod smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com wrote: Correct, but the forums are easier to scan through and search, Jan, I wonder if you've ever had a question, googled for an answer and landed in a forum thread with 50+ pages with 10 posts per page. Personally, I dislike forums even more than mailing lists. But evil are both. It's very easy to create noise, and pretty difficult to find and create the actual content. That's why StackExchange is such a success and why it's also pretty unique—it was not easy to find a really working solution. Even at SE some questions get half a dozen very technical answers and it's not easy to check and understand each of them. However a few important ideas were implemented: 1) Good and consistent text formatting. 2) Voting for questions, answers and comments. 3) Reputation indication. 4) Editing of questions and answers. 5) Search that actually works 6) Tagging and suggestion of similar topics 7) Moderation. 8) Discrete ads. 9) Excellent user interface, making it easy to ask, easy to answer and challenging to mess things up. All of these are missing in mailing lists and most are missing in forums. Cheers, Kotya ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com wrote: My issue with email lists is that for most emails I delete after reading. If at some time later, I come across a tagging situation that I recall being previously discussed I need to go into the mail archives at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo find the list (probably tagging but maybe others) and then find which month of which year it was discussed. Most forums I have seen and used have a much better search setup than that. Enter Google :) You type site: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging; and then your request and you probably get what you want. Also, if I need or want to resurrect the thread, that it typically trivial on a forum as you just post a reply. But if I’ve pulled up the old thread out of the list archive I will have broken the message ID information in the email headers that make threading options on a mail reader work well. That's true. Therefore forums *are *better than mailing lists. But they are still not good enough to make a discussion easy to follow, if it tends to split up or causes a lot of opinions. Cheers, Kotya ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Jan van Bekkum wrote It is amazing to see how few people participate in this discussion and vote compared to the number of mappers. I will only talk for myself : I'm very interested in the outcome of this specific discussion about tag proposals, and I did my best to make my way thru the 6 threads on 2 mailing lists + a wiki page for a total of around 100 messages. But that is far too much time consuming not only to read, but to answer while it was probably allready answered in another branch of mail thread number 5. A mailing list is not suited for that purpose for the time I'm ready to invest. I'd welcome a summary somewhere (a wiki page ?) after a first pass of discussion about the, says, 5 proposed changes of the proposal process that have met a few supporters. proposal 1- Voting quorum upgrade to 15 voters proposal 2- 2 thirds approval required to have the accepted sticker proposal 3- Voting period extended to 2 month proposal 4- Remove all words that make people think the wiki process is somehow an official and only way to accept tags proposal 5- give free ponies to mailing list contributors who passed the 100 emails mark in the month proposal 6- disregard any previous proposal and let every one do what they want ps: do we have a process for changing processes ? - -- sly, contact direct : sylvain /a\ letuffe o r g http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Sletuffe -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Accepted-or-rejected-tp5837104p5837849.html Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Proposal 7 - use a forum instead of 4 mailing lists and a wiki (was proposed earlier). On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:32 PM sly (sylvain letuffe) lis...@letuffe.org wrote: Jan van Bekkum wrote It is amazing to see how few people participate in this discussion and vote compared to the number of mappers. I will only talk for myself : I'm very interested in the outcome of this specific discussion about tag proposals, and I did my best to make my way thru the 6 threads on 2 mailing lists + a wiki page for a total of around 100 messages. But that is far too much time consuming not only to read, but to answer while it was probably allready answered in another branch of mail thread number 5. A mailing list is not suited for that purpose for the time I'm ready to invest. I'd welcome a summary somewhere (a wiki page ?) after a first pass of discussion about the, says, 5 proposed changes of the proposal process that have met a few supporters. proposal 1- Voting quorum upgrade to 15 voters proposal 2- 2 thirds approval required to have the accepted sticker proposal 3- Voting period extended to 2 month proposal 4- Remove all words that make people think the wiki process is somehow an official and only way to accept tags proposal 5- give free ponies to mailing list contributors who passed the 100 emails mark in the month proposal 6- disregard any previous proposal and let every one do what they want ps: do we have a process for changing processes ? - -- sly, contact direct : sylvain /a\ letuffe o r g http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Sletuffe -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble. com/Accepted-or-rejected-tp5837104p5837849.html Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 20/03/2015 4:45 AM, Kotya Karapetyan wrote: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Tod Fitch t...@fitchdesign.com mailto:t...@fitchdesign.com wrote: Also, if I need or want to resurrect the thread, that it typically trivial on a forum as you just post a reply. But if I’ve pulled up the old thread out of the list archive I will have broken the message ID information in the email headers that make threading options on a mail reader work well. That's true. Therefore forums /are /better than mailing lists. But they are still not good enough to make a discussion easy to follow, if it tends to split up or causes a lot of opinions. Cheers, Kotya The splits effect both mailing lists and forums... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
+1 on the change to a 75% threshold for voting. Negativity indicates the proposal needs work. Those with trouble scanning mailing lists should look into threading options for their mail client, or read discussions on threaded archive servers. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 19/03/2015 15:42, Jan van Bekkum wrote: Proposal 7 - use a forum instead of 4 mailing lists and a wiki (was proposed earlier). Then you'll have 4 sub-forums and a wiki. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Correct, but the forums are easier to scan through and search, On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 4:26 PM Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org wrote: On 19/03/2015 15:42, Jan van Bekkum wrote: Proposal 7 - use a forum instead of 4 mailing lists and a wiki (was proposed earlier). Then you'll have 4 sub-forums and a wiki. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
2015-03-18 0:58 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: Your rule would mean that with 7/3 would be a rejection while 8/7 an approval. I suggest to not only bring the logic back but also address this issue. +1, I would like to reflect on the quorum rule. In the end, looking at how many people map and how many people take part in tagging mailing list discussions and voting on tags, any number we can reasonably put there will be ridiculous compared to the number of mappers. On this background there is not much difference between a vote of 6 people and one of 18. If we want to stick to the quorum (what does likely make sense to avoid the theoretical problem of one or two people alone occupying useful key or value names with unusual definitions), I suggest to lower it even more, like requiring at least 5 positive votes and a 2 third majority of positive votes (or not more than one third negative votes). Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com wrote: I propose to clarify it by changing the recommended number of votes in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Approved_or_rejected from ...8 unanimous approval votes or 15 total votes with a majority approval... to ...8 or more unanimous approval votes or 10 or more total votes with more than 74 % approval This will not change anything in terms of the ongoing discussion of how the approval influences other things. So the discussion can continue. But we'd introduce some mathematical logic in the process. -1 The main criticism about votes is the approved status and the small amount of participants, not percentage of approvals. So change the status name and increase the quorum, not the opposite. It's also not a problem to keep the vote open for a long time. Pieren ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Pieren pier...@gmail.com wrote: -1 The main criticism about votes is the approved status and the small amount of participants, not percentage of approvals. So change the status name and increase the quorum, not the opposite. It's also not a problem to keep the vote open for a long time. The voting time is a separate discussion all together. In principle, we could replace the approved/rejected status with supported/not-supported. When a mapper is looking for a tag, he will see not only the amount of uses, but also the level of support (and also for the negative votes—the reasoning). This will make him able to decide whether or not he wants to use that tag. We can therefore do three things now: - Leave everything as is and continue the discussion. - Correct the math by voting for my proposal and then continue the discussion - Develop a new formula first. The current situation is that there are open proposals, so in my opinion it would help to at least resolve the unclarity we agreed on. So just to repeat: I agree with the whole argument about the drawbacks of the current discussion and voting system. But until we have a better one let's at least make the current one not self-contradictory. The discussion may take forever and not actually result in anything. Let's make the first change for the better now, and then try to make it great. Cheers, Kotya ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 18.03.2015 07:29, David Bannon wrote: And amazing how many people vote, compared to those that take part in the discussion. Indeed. I find that strange. I'd never vote on something I did not have an opinion on. And, as you lot know, if I have an opinion, I share it ! Maybe people just watch the chatter and make up their minds accordingly ? Or do people who are not tagging list subscribers watch the wiki and vote when something interesting appears ? Many people lack the time to watch the chatter, let alone participate. Mailing lists such as this one demand a lot of time. How is someone who has a daytime job and a family and who goes around mapping in his spare time supposed to also spend 2 hours a day participating in mailing lists and web forums? That's simply impossible! For the same reason, I think that proposals should stay in proposed state for at least 2 months, and that voting should also be extended to at least one month, unless the topic of the proposal is urgent for some reason. Most mappers don't read this mailing list, but they come across a proposal when searching the wiki. E.g. when someone wishes to map a beehive he's seen this morning, he'll search the wiki and he will find Proposed features/apiary. This is a very good proposal, because it lists various possible tags so that people can compare and make up their mind. A 2-week voting period after a 2-week discussion period obviously would have messed it up. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
2015-03-18 12:55 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: - Develop a new formula first. I'd prefer to require something like not more than x percent negative votes rather than at least y percent positive votes, because when requiring a percentage of positive votes all abstentions count like negative votes. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 17.03.2015 15:04, Kotya Karapetyan wrote: I propose to clarify it by changing the recommended number of votes in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Approved_or_rejected from .../8 unanimous approval votes/ /or //15 total votes with a majority approval.../ to /...8 or more //unanimous approval votes or 10 or more total votes with more than 74 % approval...//./ This will not change anything in terms of the ongoing discussion of /how/ the approval influences other things. So the discussion can continue. But we'd introduce some mathematical logic in the process. +1 I think it's not ideal that this would make it easier to accept proposals with very few voters (e.g. a 8:2 majority), so I would prefer a higher quorum (e.g. 15). But in my opinion it's still acceptable, and better than no change. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 18.03.2015 23:09, Warin wrote: A person coming across something that they want to map and then finding it on the wiki .. If that person is not on the tagging group then they don't want to be concerned with making tags, they simply want to use them. Compare it to politics. Many people don't participate in politics, but have clear political opinions, and they will tell their opinions whenever they can do it without effort. It's much easier to leave a comment in the wiki on the fly than to continously participate in a maling list reading hundreds of messages every week. Leaving comments and voting open for years won't change that .. it may simply confuse them as they want to use a tag That's fine. People should be encouraged to use their brains. .. if it is 'proposed' or 'voting' status wise they may be discouraged from using it. They use it unless they find better alternatives. I see no point in having a proposal open for voting over 1 year, those that want to vote have done so, the proposals voting should be closed and resolved. There were some proposals where I wanted to vote, but I missed the short voting timeframe. The apiary proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/apiary Promotes one tag and list other tags that could be used .. It has been in comments stage for a few years .. abandoned? I think that the abandoned status should be renamed, and that its colour should be gray or yellow instead of red. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 18.03.2015 22:40, Warin wrote: Firstly I see no point in casting a vote of 'abstention'.. why vote at all? An abstention indicates that someone has neither a strong positive nor negative feeling even after pondering. The world is not just black and white. When you look at my abstention votes, you'll find that I always pointed out my reasons for my abstention. That's what gives sense to these votes. The same applies to negative votes. A plain no vote is not helpful in any way. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Thu, 2015-03-19 at 09:09 +1100, Warin wrote: I see no point in having a proposal open for voting over 1 year, those that want to vote have done so, the proposals voting should be closed and resolved. Hmm, I disagree. Just because the proposal did not get enough votes does not mean it should disappear. Mappers looking for a suitable tag can see it, decide after reviewing its flaws to use it. And it may well become a widely used tag. My guess is the proposer was disappointed in the initial RFC response and decided he'd not get the votes. Remember, being voted in is just one way a proposal becomes 'approved'. Wide usage is the other (main one). Having that proposal listed gives users firstly, some guidance and secondly, a chance to decide for themselves. It is not easy to get usage numbers for many unapproved tags, perhaps thats worth addressing ? David The apiary proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/apiary Promotes one tag and list other tags that could be used .. It has been in comments stage for a few years .. abandoned? Sorry but I see little point in leaving a proposal open for long periods of time .. all tags will evolve over time .. no mater what the status 'inuse', 'approved' etc still means they may change over time .. leaving them as proposed does little for that long term change process. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 19/03/2015 8:36 AM, Andreas Goss wrote: What Forum? http://forum.openstreetmap.org/ __ I agree that a 'forum' is far better at engaging a community ... keeps topics more organised as replies are localised (that are no isolated branches for instance), avoids the 'digest mode' problem, some even have a system of not viewing post by someone they don't like! My experience suggests that mailing list that go to a forum find more activity than in the past. Getting 'good' activity remains a problem. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 19/03/2015 12:27 AM, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: Most mappers don't read this mailing list, but they come across a proposal when searching the wiki. E.g. when someone wishes to map a beehive he's seen this morning, he'll search the wiki and he will find Proposed features/apiary. This is a very good proposal, because it lists various possible tags so that people can compare and make up their mind. A 2-week voting period after a 2-week discussion period obviously would have messed it up. A person coming across something that they want to map and then finding it on the wiki .. If that person is not on the tagging group then they don't want to be concerned with making tags, they simply want to use them. Leaving comments and voting open for years won't change that .. it may simply confuse them as they want to use a tag .. if it is 'proposed' or 'voting' status wise they may be discouraged from using it. I see no point in having a proposal open for voting over 1 year, those that want to vote have done so, the proposals voting should be closed and resolved. The apiary proposal http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/apiary Promotes one tag and list other tags that could be used .. It has been in comments stage for a few years .. abandoned? Sorry but I see little point in leaving a proposal open for long periods of time .. all tags will evolve over time .. no mater what the status 'inuse', 'approved' etc still means they may change over time .. leaving them as proposed does little for that long term change process. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 18.03.2015 22:50, Warin wrote: I agree that a 'forum' is far better at engaging a community ... keeps topics more organised as replies are localised (that are no isolated branches for instance), avoids the 'digest mode' problem, some even have a system of not viewing post by someone they don't like! And it's easier to retrieve and reply to old threads. And the e-mail addresses are not presented to spammers on a silver platter. And you don't need to download messages you are not interested in. And you can log in using any web browser on any computer. No need for a tuned mailinglist-capable e-mail client, and no need to carry around a USB stick with old messages. Mailing lists are an obsolete technology. The may still be useful for topics where immediate actions or decisions are required, though. E.g. for discussing changeset reverts. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: I'd prefer to require something like not more than x percent negative votes rather than at least y percent positive votes, because when requiring a percentage of positive votes all abstentions count like negative votes. Martin, Do we have abstention possible at all? The voting system currently only implements yes and no: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Vote . If we had abstention, I would have rather counted it as non-supporting. A proposal where people don't care or object is not a good one IMO. However, I wouldn't mind changing it, since, as it is, there would be no difference. To not re-vote this change, let's accept it first, and then we can improve it further. Cheers, Kotya ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
It is amazing to see how few people participate in this discussion and vote compared to the number of mappers. STOP USING MAILINGLISTS!!! Those things might be nice for some tech savy people, but for everybody else it's just as mess and feels like spam. We are 100x more productive in the German Forum than on this or the de list and have much more participation... __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
What Forum? http://forum.openstreetmap.org/ __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 18/03/2015 11:13 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-03-18 12:55 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com mailto:kotya.li...@gmail.com: - Develop a new formula first. all abstentions count like negative votes. Firstly I see no point in casting a vote of 'abstention'.. why vote at all? Those casting 'abstention' once they realise it is the same as a no vote .. simply won't vote ... \ Then consider those that don't case a vote at all as abstentions.. as the vast majority don't cast a vote no proposal will be passed. So leave it up to those that do cast a valid vote. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
What Forum? Jonathan --- http://bigfatfrog67.me From: Andreas Goss Sent: Wednesday, 18 March 2015 20:19 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools It is amazing to see how few people participate in this discussion and vote compared to the number of mappers. STOP USING MAILINGLISTS!!! Those things might be nice for some tech savy people, but for everybody else it's just as mess and feels like spam. We are 100x more productive in the German Forum than on this or the de list and have much more participation... __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Wed, 2015-03-18 at 21:19 +0100, Andreas Goss wrote: ... STOP USING MAILINGLISTS!!! Those things might be nice for some tech savy people, but for everybody else it's just as mess and feels like spam. Andreas, I don't think email or mailing lists require tech savy. My 87 year old mother copes fine with some she uses. I did need to warn her about using all caps and after that, she was fine. You are unlikely to meet a less tech savy person. We are 100x more productive in the German Forum ... Fine, then why not suggest we move to a similar model ? I'm personally quite happy with the list but would be willing to consider alternatives. As, I'm sure, would others. But we'd need to be convinced it has some advantages for us... David ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
It is amazing to see how few people participate in this discussion and vote compared to the number of mappers. On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 1:01 AM Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jan, Your rule would mean that with 7/3 would be a rejection while 8/7 an approval. I suggest to not only bring the logic back but also address this issue. I agree that it changes the rules, but why not try to improve them? Cheers, Kotya On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to stick to my original proposal. It brings the logic back, but doesn't change the rules. *enough support is 8 approval votes on a total of 14 votes or less and a majority approval otherwise.* On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 4:07 PM Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Am 17.03.2015 um 15:04 schrieb Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: I don't think there is a procedure to vote on such proposals, so please just give it +1 here if you agree. We change it when we have 8+ plus ones if there are no significant objections to *this* change. Once again, please note: we are not discussing the consequences of approval/rejection, we just change the rule of thumb recommendation to a mathematically more sound one. I also don't think there is a procedure to change the proposal voting system and how votes are counted. 8 votes in favor of a change seem too few, and besides this, IMHO this is not something we should vote on the tagging mailing list, I suggest to announce it more broadly, eg on the national lists and on talk. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 7:17 AM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote: I'd suggest a large percentage of mappers are not aware of this list, or, if aware, do not see it as relevant to them and do not subscribe. I mapped for many years before subscribing. +1 but also: - most mappers are still busy with mapping more straightforward stuff like paved roads, house numbers, simple POIs. Why think of the future, there are so many more things that we can map without endless discussions ? - maybe why should I bother discussing something, while free tagging is allowed. - language barrier, please don't forget that not everybody is capable to discuss in English. The Belgian mailing list suggest to discuss in English (to avoid the French-Dutch-German problem), but we had complaints that this limits the participation. regards m. p.s. Also see Harry Wood's presentation on the last SOTM about the long tail: https://vimeo.com/album/3134207/video/112438218 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
I'd suggest a large percentage of mappers are not aware of this list, or, if aware, do not see it as relevant to them and do not subscribe. I mapped for many years before subscribing. David On Wed, 2015-03-18 at 06:08 +, Jan van Bekkum wrote: It is amazing to see how few people participate in this discussion and vote compared to the number of mappers. On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 1:01 AM Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jan, Your rule would mean that with 7/3 would be a rejection while 8/7 an approval. I suggest to not only bring the logic back but also address this issue. I agree that it changes the rules, but why not try to improve them? Cheers, Kotya On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to stick to my original proposal. It brings the logic back, but doesn't change the rules. enough support is 8 approval votes on a total of 14 votes or less and a majority approval otherwise. On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 4:07 PM Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Am 17.03.2015 um 15:04 schrieb Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: I don't think there is a procedure to vote on such proposals, so please just give it +1 here if you agree. We change it when we have 8+ plus ones if there are no significant objections to this change. Once again, please note: we are not discussing the consequences of approval/rejection, we just change the rule of thumb recommendation to a mathematically more sound one. I also don't think there is a procedure to change the proposal voting system and how votes are counted. 8 votes in favor of a change seem too few, and besides this, IMHO this is not something we should vote on the tagging mailing list, I suggest to announce it more broadly, eg on the national lists and on talk. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com wrote: It is amazing to see how few people participate in this discussion and vote compared to the number of mappers. And amazing how many people vote, compared to those that take part in the discussion. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 23:16 -0700, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: .. And amazing how many people vote, compared to those that take part in the discussion. Indeed. I find that strange. I'd never vote on something I did not have an opinion on. And, as you lot know, if I have an opinion, I share it ! Maybe people just watch the chatter and make up their minds accordingly ? Or do people who are not tagging list subscribers watch the wiki and vote when something interesting appears ? David ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
I've noticed that when the voting opens, people post about the proposal on national mailing lists and fora. I guess several people then take a look for the first time. regards m. On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 7:29 AM, David Bannon dban...@internode.on.net wrote: On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 23:16 -0700, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: .. And amazing how many people vote, compared to those that take part in the discussion. Indeed. I find that strange. I'd never vote on something I did not have an opinion on. And, as you lot know, if I have an opinion, I share it ! Maybe people just watch the chatter and make up their minds accordingly ? Or do people who are not tagging list subscribers watch the wiki and vote when something interesting appears ? David ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Am 17.03.2015 um 15:04 schrieb Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: I don't think there is a procedure to vote on such proposals, so please just give it +1 here if you agree. We change it when we have 8+ plus ones if there are no significant objections to this change. Once again, please note: we are not discussing the consequences of approval/rejection, we just change the rule of thumb recommendation to a mathematically more sound one. I also don't think there is a procedure to change the proposal voting system and how votes are counted. 8 votes in favor of a change seem too few, and besides this, IMHO this is not something we should vote on the tagging mailing list, I suggest to announce it more broadly, eg on the national lists and on talk. cheers Martin___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: inscription note (not rendered .. for use by mappers to make notes to other mappers ? thus not required to be rendered?) Visible in a popup in geschichtskarten for historical items. But you were talking about all renderers I thought. Now you seem happy that there is 1 renderer showing the feature/data ? I'm still convinced that features that people want to map will be mapped, regardless of the state of the tagging proposal. m. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Yep, count me as +1 David On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 15:04 +0100, Kotya Karapetyan wrote: Dear all, I think we deviated from the original question quite a bit. The point was that the current number of votes proposed in the wiki for accepted/rejected decision was self-contradicting. Even if there may be different opinions on that, the very discussion shows that the situation is not clear. I propose to clarify it by changing the recommended number of votes in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Approved_or_rejected from ...8 unanimous approval votes or 15 total votes with a majority approval... to ...8 or more unanimous approval votes or 10 or more total votes with more than 74 % approval This will not change anything in terms of the ongoing discussion of how the approval influences other things. So the discussion can continue. But we'd introduce some mathematical logic in the process. I don't think there is a procedure to vote on such proposals, so please just give it +1 here if you agree. We change it when we have 8+ plus ones if there are no significant objections to this change. Once again, please note: we are not discussing the consequences of approval/rejection, we just change the rule of thumb recommendation to a mathematically more sound one. Cheers, Kotya On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: inscription note (not rendered .. for use by mappers to make notes to other mappers ? thus not required to be rendered?) Visible in a popup in geschichtskarten for historical items. But you were talking about all renderers I thought. Now you seem happy that there is 1 renderer showing the feature/data ? I'm still convinced that features that people want to map will be mapped, regardless of the state of the tagging proposal. m. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
+1 2015-03-17 15:04 GMT+01:00 Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: Dear all, I think we deviated from the original question quite a bit. The point was that the current number of votes proposed in the wiki for accepted/rejected decision was self-contradicting. Even if there may be different opinions on that, the very discussion shows that the situation is not clear. I propose to clarify it by changing the recommended number of votes in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Approved_or_rejected from ...*8 unanimous approval votes* *or **15 total votes with a majority approval...* to *...8 or more **unanimous approval votes or 10 or more total votes with more than 74 % approval...**.* This will not change anything in terms of the ongoing discussion of *how* the approval influences other things. So the discussion can continue. But we'd introduce some mathematical logic in the process. I don't think there is a procedure to vote on such proposals, so please just give it +1 here if you agree. We change it when we have 8+ plus ones if there are no significant objections to *this* change. Once again, please note: we are not discussing the consequences of approval/rejection, we just change the rule of thumb recommendation to a mathematically more sound one. Cheers, Kotya On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: inscription note (not rendered .. for use by mappers to make notes to other mappers ? thus not required to be rendered?) Visible in a popup in geschichtskarten for historical items. But you were talking about all renderers I thought. Now you seem happy that there is 1 renderer showing the feature/data ? I'm still convinced that features that people want to map will be mapped, regardless of the state of the tagging proposal. m. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: I also don't think there is a procedure to change the proposal voting system and how votes are counted. 8 votes in favor of a change seem too few, and besides this, IMHO this is not something we should vote on the tagging mailing list, I suggest to announce it more broadly, eg on the national lists and on talk. Hi Martin, I proposed 8 votes because this is how the proposals are approved :) I couldn't come up with a higher number, for the same reason why we have such a low number of voters for proposals. As for where to discuss it: If we discuss the proposals on this list, isn't it a natural place to discuss how we vote for them as well? If all people interested in proposing things or voting for them are present here, then this is the right place to agree how we vote for them. If interested people are not reading this list, then how are they supposed to join the tagging discussion? I agree though that it should be at least mentioned in the page talk. Will do. Cheers, Kotya ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Hi Jan, Your rule would mean that with 7/3 would be a rejection while 8/7 an approval. I suggest to not only bring the logic back but also address this issue. I agree that it changes the rules, but why not try to improve them? Cheers, Kotya On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to stick to my original proposal. It brings the logic back, but doesn't change the rules. *enough support is 8 approval votes on a total of 14 votes or less and a majority approval otherwise.* On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 4:07 PM Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Am 17.03.2015 um 15:04 schrieb Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: I don't think there is a procedure to vote on such proposals, so please just give it +1 here if you agree. We change it when we have 8+ plus ones if there are no significant objections to *this* change. Once again, please note: we are not discussing the consequences of approval/rejection, we just change the rule of thumb recommendation to a mathematically more sound one. I also don't think there is a procedure to change the proposal voting system and how votes are counted. 8 votes in favor of a change seem too few, and besides this, IMHO this is not something we should vote on the tagging mailing list, I suggest to announce it more broadly, eg on the national lists and on talk. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: +1 on *...8 or more **unanimous approval votes or 10 or more total votes with more than 74 % approval...**.* This is a ridiculous low number when there are +2.000.000 accounts and +3300 active mappers yesterday. But I understand that due to the long tail you can't ask for more, but I still have a bad feeling about those numbers A separate debate is how to increase voting participation. making pending votes more visible in the editing tools could help. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: +1 on *...8 or more **unanimous approval votes or 10 or more total votes with more than 74 % approval...**.* This is a ridiculous low number when there are +2.000.000 accounts and +3300 active mappers yesterday. But I understand that due to the long tail you can't ask for more, but I still have a bad feeling about those numbers. regards m ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Dear all, I think we deviated from the original question quite a bit. The point was that the current number of votes proposed in the wiki for accepted/rejected decision was self-contradicting. Even if there may be different opinions on that, the very discussion shows that the situation is not clear. I propose to clarify it by changing the recommended number of votes in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Approved_or_rejected from ...*8 unanimous approval votes* *or **15 total votes with a majority approval...* to *...8 or more **unanimous approval votes or 10 or more total votes with more than 74 % approval...**.* This will not change anything in terms of the ongoing discussion of *how* the approval influences other things. So the discussion can continue. But we'd introduce some mathematical logic in the process. I don't think there is a procedure to vote on such proposals, so please just give it +1 here if you agree. We change it when we have 8+ plus ones if there are no significant objections to *this* change. Once again, please note: we are not discussing the consequences of approval/rejection, we just change the rule of thumb recommendation to a mathematically more sound one. Cheers, Kotya On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: inscription note (not rendered .. for use by mappers to make notes to other mappers ? thus not required to be rendered?) Visible in a popup in geschichtskarten for historical items. But you were talking about all renderers I thought. Now you seem happy that there is 1 renderer showing the feature/data ? I'm still convinced that features that people want to map will be mapped, regardless of the state of the tagging proposal. m. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
+1 On Mar 17, 2015, at 7:04 AM, Kotya Karapetyan wrote: Dear all, I think we deviated from the original question quite a bit. The point was that the current number of votes proposed in the wiki for accepted/rejected decision was self-contradicting. Even if there may be different opinions on that, the very discussion shows that the situation is not clear. I propose to clarify it by changing the recommended number of votes in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Approved_or_rejected from ...8 unanimous approval votes or 15 total votes with a majority approval... to ...8 or more unanimous approval votes or 10 or more total votes with more than 74 % approval This will not change anything in terms of the ongoing discussion of how the approval influences other things. So the discussion can continue. But we'd introduce some mathematical logic in the process. I don't think there is a procedure to vote on such proposals, so please just give it +1 here if you agree. We change it when we have 8+ plus ones if there are no significant objections to this change. Once again, please note: we are not discussing the consequences of approval/rejection, we just change the rule of thumb recommendation to a mathematically more sound one. Cheers, Kotya smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
+1 Jonathan http://bigfatfrog67.me From: Kotya Karapetyan Sent: Tuesday, 17 March 2015 14:04 To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools Dear all, I think we deviated from the original question quite a bit. The point was that the current number of votes proposed in the wiki for accepted/rejected decision was self-contradicting. Even if there may be different opinions on that, the very discussion shows that the situation is not clear. I propose to clarify it by changing the recommended number of votes in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features#Approved_or_rejected from ...8 unanimous approval votes or 15 total votes with a majority approval... to ...8 or more unanimous approval votes or 10 or more total votes with more than 74 % approval This will not change anything in terms of the ongoing discussion of how the approval influences other things. So the discussion can continue. But we'd introduce some mathematical logic in the process. I don't think there is a procedure to vote on such proposals, so please just give it +1 here if you agree. We change it when we have 8+ plus ones if there are no significant objections to this change. Once again, please note: we are not discussing the consequences of approval/rejection, we just change the rule of thumb recommendation to a mathematically more sound one. Cheers, Kotya On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 7:35 AM, Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: inscription note (not rendered .. for use by mappers to make notes to other mappers ? thus not required to be rendered?) Visible in a popup in geschichtskarten for historical items. But you were talking about all renderers I thought. Now you seem happy that there is 1 renderer showing the feature/data ? I'm still convinced that features that people want to map will be mapped, regardless of the state of the tagging proposal. m. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
I would like to stick to my original proposal. It brings the logic back, but doesn't change the rules. *enough support is 8 approval votes on a total of 14 votes or less and a majority approval otherwise.* On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 4:07 PM Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Am 17.03.2015 um 15:04 schrieb Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: I don't think there is a procedure to vote on such proposals, so please just give it +1 here if you agree. We change it when we have 8+ plus ones if there are no significant objections to *this* change. Once again, please note: we are not discussing the consequences of approval/rejection, we just change the rule of thumb recommendation to a mathematically more sound one. I also don't think there is a procedure to change the proposal voting system and how votes are counted. 8 votes in favor of a change seem too few, and besides this, IMHO this is not something we should vote on the tagging mailing list, I suggest to announce it more broadly, eg on the national lists and on talk. cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Warin 61sundow...@gmail.com wrote: Approval and rejection at the moment are only tagging group indicators.. the best 'indicator' is that it is rendered. And that is not a function of JOSM nor iD .. but the renderers .. there are a few of them .. if they all render some OSM object then that tag has 'made it'. I think the 'approval' and 'rejection' should stay where it is .. it is not the be all and end all of a tag. -1, Think about the surface, the turn:lanes, destination or 3D buildings keys. They are not rendered on all few renderers. Still they are important enough to keep (just assume they just past your approval process), as some navigation software will rely on them or specialized maps. I don't think being rendered on all renderers is a proper decision criteria. regards m ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
2015-03-16 11:55 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com: I don't think being rendered on all renderers is a proper decision criteria +1, the list of tags mostly not rendered but well established is long: opening_hours wikipedia start_date operator (population) (is actually taken into account when rendering) turn_restrictions routes (well, some renderers do show them, but osm carto doesn't) description inscription note website phone url ... plus all other keys that don't even get imported into most of the rendering databases. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 16/03/2015 7:11 PM, Friedrich Volkmann wrote: On 14.03.2015 21:27, Clifford Snow wrote: I would suggest adopting Conditional Approval approach. If the proposal receives sufficient votes, it becomes Conditionally Approved. Only after it becomes widespread and adopted by JOSM and iD it becomes an Approved tag. No. Editor developers aleady have too much power. Editor support often depends on the mood of one single person. I would rather say that, for a given number of occurrences, editor support should be considered a counter indicator for approval. When usage spreads in spite of no editor support, that means that mappers choose the tag on purpose. When usage remains intermediate in spite of editor support, that means that mappers use the tag only because it is imposed by the editor. Mappers don't use a tag .. even ones 'suggested' by an editor unless they 'fit'. Beginner mappers, like me, use the wiki in searching for a suitable tag, it aids understanding. They don't rely on the editor to find suitable tags as it does not provide enough information. If the wiki description is a poor match but no other tag is found you may find that tag is used or the data is not entered. Few beginner mappers will make a new tag. They may make a node with a note.. but that is about it. Approval and rejection at the moment are only tagging group indicators.. the best 'indicator' is that it is rendered. And that is not a function of JOSM nor iD .. but the renderers .. there are a few of them .. if they all render some OSM object then that tag has 'made it'. I think the 'approval' and 'rejection' should stay where it is .. it is not the be all and end all of a tag. As for increasing the 'approval' vote to a minimum of 10 with 75% .. ok .. as long as there is a time limit on the minimum number of 10, at the end of, say 6 weeks, the number requirement needs to be dropped altogether. This would encourage people to vote as after 6 weeks their lack of voting does not matter. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 16/03/2015 10:05 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-03-16 11:55 GMT+01:00 Marc Gemis marc.ge...@gmail.com mailto:marc.ge...@gmail.com: I don't think being rendered on all renderers is a proper decision criteria +1, the list of tags mostly not rendered but well established is long: opening_hours (used by some renderers into GPS 'maps' such as OSMAnd) wikipedia start_date operator (population) (is actually taken into account when rendering) turn_restrictions (used by at least some routers on GPS 'maps') routes (well, some renderers do show them, but osm carto doesn't) (Rendered by some as you say) description inscription note (not rendered .. for use by mappers to make notes to other mappers ? thus not required to be rendered?) website phone url ... plus all other keys that don't even get imported into most of the rendering databases. cheers, Martin I think most, if not all, of the tags you list .. I'm not using... other than the ones I've made notes on... while they may be long established they may not be used by new mappers and thus be less populated than they could be. Hard to measure, but that is my take on it. I think there are keys that could be rendered that simply miss out because they are not frequently used or are not present as a tag option. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 14.03.2015 21:11, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com mailto:kotya.li...@gmail.com wrote: Proposal: let's change it to 8 unanimous approval votes or 10 or more votes with at least 74 % approval ones? +1 on that. Anything without a super-majority clearly needs more discussion and/or experience. In that case, we shouldn't mark it as rejected, but rather as something like not proven. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 14.03.2015 21:27, Clifford Snow wrote: I would suggest adopting Conditional Approval approach. If the proposal receives sufficient votes, it becomes Conditionally Approved. Only after it becomes widespread and adopted by JOSM and iD it becomes an Approved tag. No. Editor developers aleady have too much power. Editor support often depends on the mood of one single person. I would rather say that, for a given number of occurrences, editor support should be considered a counter indicator for approval. When usage spreads in spite of no editor support, that means that mappers choose the tag on purpose. When usage remains intermediate in spite of editor support, that means that mappers use the tag only because it is imposed by the editor. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Proposal: let's change it to 8 unanimous approval votes or 10 or more votes with at least 74 % approval ones? I agree that the current situation looks funny pretty often. On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 6:46 PM, Bryce Nesbitt bry...@obviously.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 5:47 AM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote: As you are already indicating, 15 is too low a quorum in that case. We cannot considering 8:7 votes an approval when we cosider 8:1 votes an approval. That would mean that more negative votes would turn a rejection to an approval, which is absurd. Exactly that happened. There was a proposal with 7 votes, some positive some negative. 3 more people voted no, flipping it to approval. If the purpose of the wiki procedure is to find consensus, a bare 50% majority indicates a near complete failure. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
The reality is that a tag becomes approved once it is adopted by developers and is used extensively. Voting has its purpose, mainly to weed out proposals that need more work. As others have said 8 approvals and 7 declines indicate that more work needs to be done. Even if a proposal receives 8 approvals and no declines, it really hasn't been accepted. I would suggest adopting Conditional Approval approach. If the proposal receives sufficient votes, it becomes Conditionally Approved. Only after it becomes widespread and adopted by JOSM and iD it becomes an Approved tag. Conditional Approval would last for a period of time which may be extended. For example, a 1 year period with 1 or 2 6 months extensions. If it doesn't reach the widespread use threshold, the tag will be declared as Not Approved. It will be up to the originators to track it's use and request updates to JOSM and iD. Some subjectivity to the term, widespread needs to be applied. For instance, a niche shop might be approved with only a small number of tags. However, a fitness_centre tag would required several hundred before approval. -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 15/03/2015 4:44 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 4:24 AM, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com mailto:jan.vanbek...@gmail.com wrote: This sounds a bit strange to me: a proposal with 8 approval votes and 1 decline would be rejected, while one with 8 approval votes and 7 declines would be accepted. Anything with that level of opposition (7 declines) is probably a flawed proposal. Depends on the reasons for rejection; If the majority point to some failure .. then yes there may be a need for revision. On the other hand if they all point in different directions and at least most of those reasons can be refuted then I'd say not. --- Rules .. meant for the obedience of fools and the guidance of the wise. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Kotya Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com wrote: Proposal: let's change it to 8 unanimous approval votes or 10 or more votes with at least 74 % approval ones? +1 on that. Anything without a super-majority clearly needs more discussion and/or experience. The proponents are free to starting using the tags of course. Often using tags helps refine them: bad ideas become apparent. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 14.03.2015 12:50, Dan S wrote: When there is very low interest (i.e. very few votes) - which is pretty common - then even one dissenting vote is enough to make us step back and think again, whereas if there are enough votes to make majority approval a meaningful concept (I admit that 15 is a low number for quorum) then we accept that there will always be some disagreement, and so we use majority rather than unanimity. As you are already indicating, 15 is too low a quorum in that case. We cannot considering 8:7 votes an approval when we cosider 8:1 votes an approval. That would mean that more negative votes would turn a rejection to an approval, which is absurd. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
Hi, No, I think it means what it says. Or at least, I think we have treated it that way for a long while. When there is very low interest (i.e. very few votes) - which is pretty common - then even one dissenting vote is enough to make us step back and think again, whereas if there are enough votes to make majority approval a meaningful concept (I admit that 15 is a low number for quorum) then we accept that there will always be some disagreement, and so we use majority rather than unanimity. This is how I interpret it. I'm not saying it's the best rule of thumb out there. I'd say there's no point changing it in small ways - no-one likes the tag voting system, and overhaul would be better than slight tweaks. Anyway, it is only a rule of thumb! Best Dan 2015-03-14 11:24 GMT+00:00 Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com: The guideline to determine if a proposal is accepted is A rule of thumb for enough support is 8 unanimous approval votes or 15 total votes with a majority approval, but other factors may also be considered (such as whether a feature is already in use). This sounds a bit strange to me: a proposal with 8 approval votes and 1 decline would be rejected, while one with 8 approval votes and 7 declines would be accepted. I suppose that this is what was intended: enough support is 8 approval votes on a total of 14 votes or less and a majority approval otherwise. Regards, Jan ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On 14.03.2015 12:24, Jan van Bekkum wrote: The guideline to determine if a proposal is accepted is A rule of thumb for enough support is /8 unanimous approval votes/ or /15 total votes with a majority approval/, but other factors may also be considered (such as whether a feature is already in use). This sounds a bit strange to me: a proposal with 8 approval votes and 1 decline would be rejected, while one with 8 approval votes and 7 declines would be accepted. I suppose that this is what was intended: enough support is 8 approval votes on a total of 14 votes or less and a majority approval otherwise. Yes, this should be reworded as you suggest. The current wording caused confusion multiple times. However, we should keep the mention of other factors ... such as whether a feature is already in use, especially when it comes to deprecation of existing tags. I think that this should be even more clearly pointed out. A majority of 8:7 votes cannot be sufficient for a deprecation of a tag used by thousands of mappers. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 4:24 AM, Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbek...@gmail.com wrote: This sounds a bit strange to me: a proposal with 8 approval votes and 1 decline would be rejected, while one with 8 approval votes and 7 declines would be accepted. Anything with that level of opposition (7 declines) is probably a flawed proposal. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Accepted or rejected?
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 5:47 AM, Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at wrote: As you are already indicating, 15 is too low a quorum in that case. We cannot considering 8:7 votes an approval when we cosider 8:1 votes an approval. That would mean that more negative votes would turn a rejection to an approval, which is absurd. Exactly that happened. There was a proposal with 7 votes, some positive some negative. 3 more people voted no, flipping it to approval. If the purpose of the wiki procedure is to find consensus, a bare 50% majority indicates a near complete failure. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
