Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
Hi, On 25.10.2017 08:09, Златовратский Павел wrote: > Well. That's the problem in your position: you point to specific > problems and ask to stop whole process. Which "process" exactly are you talking about? There have been many processes mentioned in this discussion. > I met such behaviour with software implementation: people reject to use > software miss some feature even when software already do half of their job. "Half a good edit" is not good enough though. > I don't think any number of problems with automated edits is reason to > stop them. Automated edits need to be discussed in a suitable forum before they are executed, and must not be executed if there's significant opposition. An automated edit that affects only Russia may be sufficiently discussed on the .ru mailing list but one that is run in Latvia not. > Otherwise on next step we should ask to stop using of wikipedia links: > only name=* could be validated on the ground, there is no label on > object with wikipedia URL and 'guessed' wiki links sometimes became wrong. Well, certainly Wikipedia links should only be added by people who know something about the feature in question, and not by a machine that compares name tags to Wikipedia entries and takes a wild guess. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Local knowledge (was: Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?)
Hi, On 25.10.2017 08:22, Tomas Straupis wrote: > Yuri later tried to change the whole theme from "osm-wikidata-sql > tool" to "new general qa tool" in the same thread. And now into "is local knowledge really always necessary". I'm sure before too long Yuri will be starting to discuss whether what we see is really there, or perhaps just an imagination, and explain to us that we can't prove either way. The answer to the "local knowledge" issue is this: Local knowledge comes in shades. Someone who hasn't been to a particular street but lives in the same city can certainly make a better guess about things than someone who lives in the same country but in another city; and that person's assessment about something will still be better than that of a third person who doesn't speak the language and lives a continent away. Local knowledge nearly always beats "common sense" applied by someone from far away. The person from far away *might* change "Thomas Eddison Street" to "Thomas Edison Street" based on general knowledge, but then if the local person says "no, it really says Eddison on the street sign" then that's what it is. But even in the absence of a particular objection from someone local, many in OSM take a dim view of "gardening" in areas where you don't even know the language or culture. It is much too easy to make mistakes. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
Hi, On 25.10.2017 05:53, Ryszard Mikke wrote: > You mean "stop any editing, More like "stop any Wikidata-related large-scale editing or setting up of tools that have the intent of causing Wikidata-related large-scale editing". It's totally ok for individuals to add Wikidata links to things they are mapping anyway, it's just not ok for people from 1000 miles away to fiddle with Wikidata tags, ESPECIALLY if these people lack OSM experience. If you're new to OSM then a good choice of task is to do some mapping in your local area, not to shower the whole planet with "helpful" Wikidata edits. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
2017-10-25 8:56 GMT+03:00 Yuri Astrakhan wrote: > Roland, thanks for the links. Local knowledge is very important, but lets > not make it into a sacred cow at the cost of common sense. I have not been > to every single street in New York City. I am nearly 100% sure that all > editors has edited objects that were near their location, but that they have > not actually visited, or walked by without walking in, etc. Local knowledge > is an important concept, but its physically impossible to walk into every > building and research every tag for every building. Or are you saying Tomas > has visited every single street/building in Lithuania? > ... Check the name of this topic: "stop ... wikidata ..." This started as a discussion about automated adding of one specific wikidata tag and about doing it without discussing with local community. My whole response was about THAT. Yuri later tried to change the whole theme from "osm-wikidata-sql tool" to "new general qa tool" in the same thread. This change gives a lot of confusion on what are we really talking about. Only when talking about automated adding of wikidata or changing other tags based on wikidata I am strongly opposing and doing reverts. I'm strongly in favour of automated checking, comparing etc. - we've done a number (~40) of Lithuania specific rules starting with addressing information and up to topological rule checking. So if you really want to talk about that DIFFERENT topic: new QA tool (alongside years of existence of keepright, osm inspector, osmose, some other ones) - you need to create a new thread and discuss it there. I would really want to know what new functionality you are proposing etc. Collecting errors from a number of different sources for fixing is already somewhat complex so it would be nice to understand what is a benefit of creating a new tool rather than adding new rules to one of the existing QA tools. -- Tomas ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
25.10.2017 7:46, Tomas Straupis пишет: But this topic has already listed numerous problems with your automated (or semiautomated) edits all around, ignoring local communities etc. You have been asked to stop numerous times. Well. That's the problem in your position: you point to specific problems and ask to stop whole process. So instead of fix these problems (you did not ask for this) people just ignore you. I met such behaviour with software implementation: people reject to use software miss some feature even when software already do half of their job. I don't think any number of problems with automated edits is reason to stop them. I think it is reason to fix problems. Like: don't fix disambiguation wikipedia links if there is wikidata point to disambiguation page(i.e. it is intentionally disambiguation link) and don't add wikidata to disambiguation wikipedia page. Otherwise on next step we should ask to stop using of wikipedia links: only name=* could be validated on the ground, there is no label on object with wikipedia URL and 'guessed' wiki links sometimes became wrong. -- С уважением, Златовратский Павел. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
Roland, thanks for the links. Local knowledge is very important, but lets not make it into a sacred cow at the cost of common sense. I have not been to every single street in New York City. I am nearly 100% sure that all editors has edited objects that were near their location, but that they have not actually visited, or walked by without walking in, etc. Local knowledge is an important concept, but its physically impossible to walk into every building and research every tag for every building. Or are you saying Tomas has visited every single street/building in Lithuania? Also, local knowledge doesn't trump tagging standards - if I start tagging national highways as power lines simply because I happened to be in the area, it does not mean I am right -- more likely it means I am a novice editor that should be helped by anyone - even if they are on the other side of the planet. My reading of Tomas answer is not that the Wikipedia tag was not fixed, or that it can't be fixed, but that it should be left untouched because it should be fixed in a perfect way only by a local, with all other tags too, and it is better to have completely wrong tags than to have good tags but other tags in less than perfect state. This is not local knowledge, this is an editing preference, and a strange one at that. Local knowledge needs to coexist with OSM as a global movement, so I do hope this is not a turf war, but rather a misunderstand that can be easily solved by reason. On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Roland Olbricht wrote: > But what you are saying is very strange if I understood you correctly. >> What I read here is that the only people allowed to fix things are those >> that know ALL tags and their meaning. >> > > See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Wikipedia_use > rs#Original_research_always_wins > > Or similar statements on > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Getting_Involved#Working_on_the_map > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what. > 27s_on_the_ground > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes#On_the_Ground_Rule > > It is the local knowledge that matters. Tomas does know what it looks like > there, and deems the wikipedia link correct. This is in line with similar > cases like the mentioned distinction Aldi Nord/Aldi Süd and other. > > We expect you to assure that the tool is used only (or almost only) in > cases where the user has local knowledge, i.e. has been there, physically, > in person. Otherwise the tool is considered a disguised bot, no matter how > it is dressed. > > Best regards, > > Roland > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Welcome_to_OpenStreetMap_users ?
On 2017-10-25 07:31, Daniel Koć wrote: W dniu 25.10.2017 o 07:08, Roland Olbricht pisze: See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Wikipedia_users#Original_research_always_wins Why is this page named "Welcome_to_Wikipedia_users"? Can we just move it to "Welcome_to_OpenStreetMap_users" or there are some not obvious problems with that? You have to read it as "a welcome to wikipedia users", a greeting that is extended from the OSM community. Maarten ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Welcome_to_OpenStreetMap_users ?
I think this is to contrast our rules with their - quite different - rules. But maybe you're right. Obviously in the old times much of our users were Wikipedians. Michał 25.10.2017 07:36 "Daniel Koć" napisał(a): > W dniu 25.10.2017 o 07:08, Roland Olbricht pisze: > >> See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Wikipedia_use >> rs#Original_research_always_wins >> > > Why is this page named "Welcome_to_Wikipedia_users"? Can we just move it > to "Welcome_to_OpenStreetMap_users" or there are some not obvious > problems with that? > > -- > "My method is uncertain/ It's a mess but it's working" [F. Apple] > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] Welcome_to_OpenStreetMap_users ?
W dniu 25.10.2017 o 07:08, Roland Olbricht pisze: See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Wikipedia_users#Original_research_always_wins Why is this page named "Welcome_to_Wikipedia_users"? Can we just move it to "Welcome_to_OpenStreetMap_users" or there are some not obvious problems with that? -- "My method is uncertain/ It's a mess but it's working" [F. Apple] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
But what you are saying is very strange if I understood you correctly. What I read here is that the only people allowed to fix things are those that know ALL tags and their meaning. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Wikipedia_users#Original_research_always_wins Or similar statements on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Getting_Involved#Working_on_the_map https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what.27s_on_the_ground https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes#On_the_Ground_Rule It is the local knowledge that matters. Tomas does know what it looks like there, and deems the wikipedia link correct. This is in line with similar cases like the mentioned distinction Aldi Nord/Aldi Süd and other. We expect you to assure that the tool is used only (or almost only) in cases where the user has local knowledge, i.e. has been there, physically, in person. Otherwise the tool is considered a disguised bot, no matter how it is dressed. Best regards, Roland ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
2017-10-25 6:53 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote: > You mean "stop any editing, cause we need two weeks or two years to make > sure refs are correct and we don't have any other means to remember about > the problem than to leave some obvious mistake everyone will trip over until > we are sure about those refs"? Like, start a discussion at one of the > hillfort articles in Wikipedia and live a note inOSM to check refs from time > to time, with a link to the Wikipedia discussion? No. If you take that one particular edit out of the whole context - it would be incorrect to revert it. But this topic has already listed numerous problems with your automated (or semiautomated) edits all around, ignoring local communities etc. You have been asked to stop numerous times. You have ignored all those and continued bulldozing. THAT is the reason for reverting. The fact that some edits were not totally wrong does not change anything, your edits were still useless (doable by autoscripts) and unwanted (explicitly stated) in this situation anyway. I do not want to spend time and do WORK to check if your automated NON-WORK has produced WORK for others. -- Tomas ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
On 24 October 2017 at 17:19, Tomas Straupis wrote: > 2017-10-24 15:56 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote: > > Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to > > disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in > > Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in > > Wikipedia? > > So that the case is not forgotten and fixed properly (i.e. ALL tags > fixed) by people who know how to do it, not by those who are doing > guesswork and just silencing the "qa" script. > > You mean "stop any editing, cause we need two weeks or two years to make sure refs are correct and we don't have any other means to remember about the problem than to leave some obvious mistake everyone will trip over until we are sure about those refs"? Like, start a discussion at one of the hillfort articles in Wikipedia and live a note inOSM to check refs from time to time, with a link to the Wikipedia discussion? -- -- http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/ r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com دراجة أكبر ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
On 24/10/2017 18:07, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Tomas Straupis mailto:tomasstrau...@gmail.com>> wrote: 2017-10-24 15:56 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote: > Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to > disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in > Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in > Wikipedia? So that the case is not forgotten and fixed properly (i.e. ALL tags fixed) by people who know how to do it, not by those who are doing guesswork and just silencing the "qa" script. But in general all automated guess-edits are reverted for the time being because it was clearly stated they are unhelpful and so unwanted. Tomas, I do agree that there should not be an automatic script setting tags based on a heuristic. But what you are saying is very strange if I understood you correctly. What I read here is that the only people allowed to fix things are those that know ALL tags and their meaning. This goes counter to the common sense (nobody knows all 65000+ tags), and counter to the existing warnings, such as JOSM's validator "when in doubt, ignore them". You can never have a person who knows everything about both - the place and OSM tags. There are two axis of editing: local knowledge and OSM knowledge. They are orthogonal - I could be a tagging expert, but not know the area, or a novice editor with the expert local knowledge. Additionally, "local knowledge" very rapidly decays as you move away from where you live - another street, neighborhood, city, state, country, continent. If I see a problem, I can reasonably research the topic, gain knowledge, and fix the problems in my area of expertise. Of course someone who lives in the incorrectly tagged building, and happens to be an expert OSM editor would be ideal, but sorry, no such luck. In most cases, the editors who decide to help will make data better. It might not be perfect, but it is better than before. When you say you will revert things despite making data worse, just because you disagree with HOW the problem was found, and not on the basis of decreasing data quality, you go against the very idea of a common sense. There is only one reasonable approach to editing - data should be in a better shape after you than before. More accurate. More complete. Please don't make assumptions that the data has gotten worse just because you disagree that there should be a qa script - after all, you are using them yourself, and no one is reverting all your work based on that. +1 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New OSM Quick-Fix service
Ryszard, I have disabled the fixing from the "embed" mode - you can still open the query (using "edit query"), click the "run" button (blue play button), and fix things from there. In my spare time, I am still working on the next version, based on all the useful feedback: * It will be easy to find the changes made for a specific task, and review or revert them. * It will be possible to "vote" on a change for an experimental task. E.g., unless the task is marked as safe, two people will have to agree on a change before it happens, assuming there are no "no" votes. * It will be possible to have multiple choice tasks. * multiple changes for the same task can go into the same changeset * All votes will be stored in the same RDF database, making it possible to use vote information in tasks. I will write up a bit more about this project in a bit. I think there was a number of misconceptions about it, namely that it only relates to Wikidata, and that its a bot rather than a platform for the community to create and review tasks. On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Ryszard Mikke wrote: > Even without disabling - what a better tool fixes, JOSM's autofix won't > find... > > On 17 October 2017 at 09:50, Yuri Astrakhan > wrote: > >> Well, you kind of can fix one with the other - by introducing a better >> tool and disabling some of the autofixes in JOSM (very easy to do). A more >> complex approach would clearly require a separate topic(s) and a >> substantial dev involvement. >> >> P.S. No, https://master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/ doesn't have any >> real data (it shows maps from live servers, but editing shows just a few >> objects). >> >> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:36 AM, Tobias Zwick wrote: >> >>> I get your point, especially regarding the appliance of the JOSM >>> fix-button as a "by-the-way" fixing. >>> >>> Though, you can't fix possible issues with of one tool by introducing >>> another tool. People will not stop using (that feature of) JOSM. That is >>> why I think, if you think you detected a problematic issue there in that >>> editor, it should be discussed in a separate topic. >>> >>> On 17/10/2017 00:57, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: >>> > Michael, I can only judge by my own experience adding validation >>> autofix >>> > rules - I added a number of Wikipedia tag auto cleanups to JOSM, and >>> > they were reviewed by one or two JOSM developers and merged, probably >>> > because they were deemed benign. I don't know about the other rules, >>> > but I suspect many of them also went this route. Should have they been >>> > discussed more widely? I don't know, but that question is complicated, >>> > just like "what is a local community?" question. What a few devs may >>> see >>> > as benign, others may say needs a discussion, right? >>> > >>> > Mass editing is a different matter. We consider mass editing when one >>> > person goes out to fix something everywhere in the world. But when we >>> > provide a tool that automatically fixes something that you are looking >>> > at, we don't view it as such. Or at least we don't view it when it >>> > happens as part of JOSM, but we do when it happens in my new tool. Of >>> > course there is an important difference - JOSM doesn't guide you >>> towards >>> > those cases. >>> > >>> > I think massive "by-the-way" fixing is far worse than the targeted fix >>> > of a single issue. >>> > >>> > When you want to fix a single issue in many places, you become a >>> subject >>> > matter expert. You know all about that change, how it interacts with >>> > other tags, what to watch out for, how to handle bad values, etc. For >>> > example, when fixing wikipedia tags, you would see the types of >>> mistakes >>> > people make, wrong prefixes people use, incorrect url encodings, hash >>> > tags in urls, incorrect multiple values, ... .When you simply click >>> > "fix" because JOSM validator tells you it can fix it automatically, you >>> > don't have that knowledge, so it effectively becomes a distributed >>> > mechanical edit without the "reject" capability. My tool tries to >>> > address this - to build domain experts in a narrow field, and let those >>> > experts review changes one by one. I do not discount the value of local >>> > knowledge, but it is not a panacea - you must be both to make >>> > intelligent choices, and in some cases, the domain knowledge is more >>> > important than the knowledge of a specific locale. >>> > >>> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Michael Reichert >>> > mailto:osm...@michreichert.de>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi Yuri, >>> > >>> > Am 16.10.2017 um 16:02 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan: >>> > > Rory, most of those queries were copied from the current JOSM >>> validator >>> > > autofixes. I don't think they were discussed, but they might >>> have been >>> > > mass applied without much thought by all sorts of editors. >>> > >>> > Could you please give examples for (a) the mass appliance of these >>> rules >>> > and (b) rules which h
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Tomas Straupis wrote: > 2017-10-24 15:56 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote: > > Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to > > disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in > > Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in > > Wikipedia? > > So that the case is not forgotten and fixed properly (i.e. ALL tags > fixed) by people who know how to do it, not by those who are doing > guesswork and just silencing the "qa" script. But in general all automated guess-edits are reverted for the time > being because it was clearly stated they are unhelpful and so > unwanted. > Tomas, I do agree that there should not be an automatic script setting tags based on a heuristic. But what you are saying is very strange if I understood you correctly. What I read here is that the only people allowed to fix things are those that know ALL tags and their meaning. This goes counter to the common sense (nobody knows all 65000+ tags), and counter to the existing warnings, such as JOSM's validator "when in doubt, ignore them". You can never have a person who knows everything about both - the place and OSM tags. There are two axis of editing: local knowledge and OSM knowledge. They are orthogonal - I could be a tagging expert, but not know the area, or a novice editor with the expert local knowledge. Additionally, "local knowledge" very rapidly decays as you move away from where you live - another street, neighborhood, city, state, country, continent. If I see a problem, I can reasonably research the topic, gain knowledge, and fix the problems in my area of expertise. Of course someone who lives in the incorrectly tagged building, and happens to be an expert OSM editor would be ideal, but sorry, no such luck. In most cases, the editors who decide to help will make data better. It might not be perfect, but it is better than before. When you say you will revert things despite making data worse, just because you disagree with HOW the problem was found, and not on the basis of decreasing data quality, you go against the very idea of a common sense. There is only one reasonable approach to editing - data should be in a better shape after you than before. More accurate. More complete. Please don't make assumptions that the data has gotten worse just because you disagree that there should be a qa script - after all, you are using them yourself, and no one is reverting all your work based on that. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] How to create custom online map from OpenStreetMap
W dniu 23.10.2017 o 22:06, Andy Townsend pisze: On 22/10/2017 18:47, Carlos Cámara wrote: I would like to create a custom map for online use that loads OSM data but displays it in different ways as the standard, cyclemap, transport... layers. The most important question is: how do you want it to be different? Like trying completely new toolset (to try out technologies), just a style tuning (to change the look of a few things, like colors or labels) or something more specific? Another couple of resources to look at (if you think you'll go down the "Mapnik" route): To create a tile server with the same stylesheet as OSM's "standard" one: https://switch2osm.org/manually-building-a-tile-server-16-04-2-lts/ If you don't need a full-blown server with the whole planet for many concurrent users, you can use a Docker-based container with Kosmtik as a tile server: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/DOCKER.md -- "My method is uncertain/ It's a mess but it's working" [F. Apple] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
2017-10-24 15:56 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote: > Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to > disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in > Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in > Wikipedia? So that the case is not forgotten and fixed properly (i.e. ALL tags fixed) by people who know how to do it, not by those who are doing guesswork and just silencing the "qa" script. But in general all automated guess-edits are reverted for the time being because it was clearly stated they are unhelpful and so unwanted. -- Tomas ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?
Please, PLEASE, stick to the case. The case is: 1) there are two hillforts, let's call them Hillfort 1 and Hillfort 2 for simplicity. 2) both have big information tables on the ground, with their names on them 3) so they are named Hillfort 1 and Hillfort 2 in OSM and nobody objects that. 4) both have their articles on Wikipedia. The articles may be a little mixed up, but they are articles on Hillfort 1 and Hillfort 2 Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in Wikipedia? On 23 October 2017 at 13:33, Andy Townsend wrote: > On 23/10/2017 11:40, Ryszard Mikke wrote: > >> That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia >> > > Part of the problem is that some of these problems simply aren't fixable > at wikipedia. For example https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > %D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0 and https://sq.wikipedia.org/wiki/ > Serbia are allegedly the same article and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/ > Q403 lists them both. However, as can be seen by looking at the maps on > each page, they aren't the same geographic entity - one includes Kosovo, > one does not. Neither is "wrong" from the point of view of the authors of > each page yet they can't both be "correct" at the same time. > > Best Regards, > Andy > > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- -- http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/ r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com دراجة أكبر ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?
On Monday 23 October 2017, Frederik Ramm wrote: > [...] > > What would be *your* words to say "Hey everybody, I saw this, and I > think it is bad and needs to change"? What choice of language would > adequately express your being upset about what you have seen, without > being denounced as a poisonous person who harms the community by > seeking support from it? > > This is a honest question; I would really be interested in the, if I > may, "American version" of what Christoph has written. One that does > express how you're upset while at the same time *not* being > "combative" and all those bad things you said about Christoph's post. > > Maybe then I can use that to express myself in a more internationally > compatible way in the future ;) While i appreciate the intention to discuss and bridge cultural differences the topical background here will most likely prevent this from happening since the political dimension of this highly political topic is likely to prevent actually getting to the cultural differences. In other words: The replies you get to your request will primarily express different political views and much less different cultural backgrounds. Actually having this discussion without the fog of OSM politics in the way would be immensely interesting but i am not sure if this is possible in this venue. My own experience with Americans in non-political matters is usually that they are on average more tolerant than Europeans, at least on their own turf (or in other words: They seem less territorial in cultural matters). But if you get into politics (no matter if big politics or smaller topical matters like in OSM) my impression is that Europeans often have a better ability to put those politics aside and communicate without being affected by political differences. In other words: The likeliness of a Communist and an Ultra-conservative having a friendly and open chat about something like philosophy, science or art is much higher if they are Europeans. Note this is a completely subjective impression of me and in no way meant to imply being representative for any group of people. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] New OSM Quick-Fix service
Even without disabling - what a better tool fixes, JOSM's autofix won't find... On 17 October 2017 at 09:50, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: > Well, you kind of can fix one with the other - by introducing a better > tool and disabling some of the autofixes in JOSM (very easy to do). A more > complex approach would clearly require a separate topic(s) and a > substantial dev involvement. > > P.S. No, https://master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/ doesn't have any real > data (it shows maps from live servers, but editing shows just a few > objects). > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:36 AM, Tobias Zwick wrote: > >> I get your point, especially regarding the appliance of the JOSM >> fix-button as a "by-the-way" fixing. >> >> Though, you can't fix possible issues with of one tool by introducing >> another tool. People will not stop using (that feature of) JOSM. That is >> why I think, if you think you detected a problematic issue there in that >> editor, it should be discussed in a separate topic. >> >> On 17/10/2017 00:57, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: >> > Michael, I can only judge by my own experience adding validation autofix >> > rules - I added a number of Wikipedia tag auto cleanups to JOSM, and >> > they were reviewed by one or two JOSM developers and merged, probably >> > because they were deemed benign. I don't know about the other rules, >> > but I suspect many of them also went this route. Should have they been >> > discussed more widely? I don't know, but that question is complicated, >> > just like "what is a local community?" question. What a few devs may see >> > as benign, others may say needs a discussion, right? >> > >> > Mass editing is a different matter. We consider mass editing when one >> > person goes out to fix something everywhere in the world. But when we >> > provide a tool that automatically fixes something that you are looking >> > at, we don't view it as such. Or at least we don't view it when it >> > happens as part of JOSM, but we do when it happens in my new tool. Of >> > course there is an important difference - JOSM doesn't guide you towards >> > those cases. >> > >> > I think massive "by-the-way" fixing is far worse than the targeted fix >> > of a single issue. >> > >> > When you want to fix a single issue in many places, you become a subject >> > matter expert. You know all about that change, how it interacts with >> > other tags, what to watch out for, how to handle bad values, etc. For >> > example, when fixing wikipedia tags, you would see the types of mistakes >> > people make, wrong prefixes people use, incorrect url encodings, hash >> > tags in urls, incorrect multiple values, ... .When you simply click >> > "fix" because JOSM validator tells you it can fix it automatically, you >> > don't have that knowledge, so it effectively becomes a distributed >> > mechanical edit without the "reject" capability. My tool tries to >> > address this - to build domain experts in a narrow field, and let those >> > experts review changes one by one. I do not discount the value of local >> > knowledge, but it is not a panacea - you must be both to make >> > intelligent choices, and in some cases, the domain knowledge is more >> > important than the knowledge of a specific locale. >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Michael Reichert >> > mailto:osm...@michreichert.de>> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Yuri, >> > >> > Am 16.10.2017 um 16:02 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan: >> > > Rory, most of those queries were copied from the current JOSM >> validator >> > > autofixes. I don't think they were discussed, but they might >> have been >> > > mass applied without much thought by all sorts of editors. >> > >> > Could you please give examples for (a) the mass appliance of these >> rules >> > and (b) rules which have not been discussed but should have been >> > discussed? >> > > There are two ways to use the tool - you can write your own >> query, run it, >> > > and fix whatever it is you want to fix. That's the power user >> mode - >> > > anything goes, no different from JOSM or Level0. And there is >> another one - >> > > where you go to osm wiki, read the instructions, find the task >> you may want >> > > to work on, and go at it. The community reviews wiki content, >> tags >> > > different pages with different explanation or warning boxes, etc. >> The >> > > discussion could still be on the forum, or here, or in IRC, >> > >> > Just for future readers: IRC and Telegram channels are no >> replacement >> > for a mailing list or a forum with a public readable archive where >> you >> > can look up the discussions years later. >> > >> > Best regards >> > >> > Michael >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. >> (Mailinglisten >> > ausgenommen) >> > I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists) >> > >> > >> > ___
Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?
As a European who is frequently annoyed with both the harshness of some Europeans, as well as the oversensitiveness for criticism from Americans, I agree with both Frederik and Mikel. I do read a clear out-group perspective in how Christoph wrote about this subject. This to me is still strange. In the Belgian community we never had such a devision, because many of our core craftmappers (derogatory term, but quite descriptive, isn't it?) are heavily involved with HOT-style mapping. And of course we have Jorieke and Ben to glue it all together. But I agree that American sensitivity to these kinds of issues can be quite over the top. Sometimes it feels if you don't start a critisism of something without "that's absolutely amazing, but...", then you are being a negative person. Europeans tend to be less fluffy about things, if not for cultural reasons, maybe because English is usually our second (or third) language. Since I'm talking in clichés anyway, I'll add that Americans seem to have less experience with dealing with other cultures. As Belgians, we know that Germans, Brittons, French and Dutch are all slightly crazy compared to us. And we take that into account when they do weird stuff. Americans get less of a chance to gain that sort of experience, at least when coupled with a language barrier too. So in short: - assume we're all friends - try to write in a friendly way - don't read a message from someone from a different culture in the same way you would read a message from your colleague ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
