We could have an 'authoritative' layer. All authoritative data could
sit in planet-authoritative.osm - it can't be that big really on the
scale of things.
Or we could lock a few things like wikipedia locks the Jesus and
Scientology pages and only certain people can edit them.
Are there any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC wrote:
We could have an 'authoritative' layer. All authoritative data could
sit in planet-authoritative.osm - it can't be that big really on the
scale of things.
Great that you like the idea too. Could we maybe just start with some
On 30 Jun 2009, at 10:56, Stefan de Konink wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
SteveC wrote:
We could have an 'authoritative' layer. All authoritative data could
sit in planet-authoritative.osm - it can't be that big really on the
scale of things.
Great that you like
SteveC schrieb:
But then it becomes a question of 'what is authoritative' and we get
arguments that the government calls this road a primary but we have it
marked as secondary...
Well, this also raises the question: Who is authoritative enough (for
us), to authorize that the authorative
Frederik Ramm wrote:
However, we'll have more and more imports like boundaries, seamarks
and so on, which I like to consider mutable for people who know
exactly what they're doing.
Is this actually a real-world problem right now, or something we think might
possibly one day become one?
Hi,
Matt Amos wrote:
on the other hand, what's a good reason? aren't the vast majority of
edits made for a good reason, i.e: to improve the data?
Improve according to what the person editing it thinks - yes. For
example, and sorry for being pessimistic, I believe that a lot of OSM
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Improve according to what the person editing it thinks - yes. For
example, and sorry for being pessimistic, I believe that a lot of OSM
contributors would be perfectly capable to insert a few nodes into an
administrative border and move them around just to make the line
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Frederik Rammfrede...@remote.org wrote:
If their editor would inform them that they are editing the administrative
border as copied from some official publication, then they still *could*
edit the border if they e.g. had information about said official
Le dimanche 21 juin 2009 12:49, Richard Fairhurst a écrit :
Frederik Ramm wrote:
However, we'll have more and more imports like boundaries, seamarks
and so on, which I like to consider mutable for people who know
exactly what they're doing.
Is this actually a real-world problem right now,
On Jun 21, 2009, at 6:49 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Frederik Ramm wrote:
However, we'll have more and more imports like boundaries, seamarks
and so on, which I like to consider mutable for people who know
exactly what they're doing.
Is this actually a real-world problem right now, or
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 2:08 PM, Russ Nelsonr...@cloudmade.com wrote:
On Jun 21, 2009, at 6:49 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Frederik Ramm wrote:
However, we'll have more and more imports like boundaries, seamarks
and so on, which I like to consider mutable for people who know
exactly what
On Jun 21, 2009, at 10:15 AM, Matt Amos wrote:
we went over this before: if it isn't editable, it shouldn't be in
OSM.
And yet state and county borders are already in OSM.
You seem to not be paying attention to my point: that if we DON'T have
these important legal boundaries in OSM, people
Hi,
Matt Amos wrote:
absolutely. if you're interested in monitoring the state borders then
you'll be interested in a service to get emails or an RSS feed of that
area. that way you can watch over that area and ensure it's correct.
I'm all for cool monitoring features but I'd really love
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Frederik Rammfrede...@remote.org wrote:
Matt Amos wrote:
It is very easy to edit objects without ever looking at the source tag.
If
that were made impossible, yes, then you are right; but I think it is
impractical.
more impractical than inventing a new tag
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 4:29 AM, Russ Nelsonr...@cloudmade.com wrote:
On Jun 19, 2009, at 6:49 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
or alternatively make it easy to spot whether such data may
have been changed by accident.
There are a lot of reasons to have this facility. It matches in
concept with
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Erik Johanssone...@kth.se wrote:
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 4:29 AM, Russ Nelsonr...@cloudmade.com wrote:
On Jun 19, 2009, at 6:49 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
or alternatively make it easy to spot whether such data may
have been changed by accident.
There are a
Hi,
Matt Amos wrote:
bots are bad, m'kay? especially if the person who violates the
immutable rule has his own revert server. also, this system becomes
useless the moment someone teaches an editor to automatically apply
the signature or immutable rule.
I might not have been clear enough
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 12:30 AM, Frederik Rammfrede...@remote.org wrote:
Matt Amos wrote:
bots are bad, m'kay? especially if the person who violates the
immutable rule has his own revert server. also, this system becomes
useless the moment someone teaches an editor to automatically apply
the
Hi,
we recently had lengthy discussions about having immutable data in
OSM, and came to the conclusion that OSM is simply not the place for
immutable stuff - a concept that has my full support.
However, we'll have more and more imports like boundaries, seamarks and
so on, which I like to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Of course this does in no way give security but it could be a way to
spot mishaps. I'd fully expect editors to support the scheme sooner or
later, popping up are you sure and do you want me to set the magic tag
for you
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Of course this does in no way give security but it could be a way to
spot mishaps. I'd fully expect editors to support the scheme sooner or
El Sábado, 20 de Junio de 2009, Karl Newman escribió:
+1 for layers. That way we could import large, dense data sets such as
parcel outlines (for example) without getting in the way of people who want
to work on something else.
-1 for layers. If I edit parcel boundaries, I want the
Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
El Sábado, 20 de Junio de 2009, Karl Newman escribió:
+1 for layers. That way we could import large, dense data sets such as
parcel outlines (for example) without getting in the way of people who want
to work on something else.
-1 for layers. If I edit parcel
On Jun 19, 2009, at 6:49 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
or alternatively make it easy to spot whether such data may
have been changed by accident.
There are a lot of reasons to have this facility. It matches in
concept with Wikipedia's watchlist.
--
Russ Nelson -
24 matches
Mail list logo
