Re: [OSM-talk] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
These days I've been busier than usual updating the Spanish version of the "Good practice" page. Now I know why. Thank you all. Regards, Daniel -- Sent from: http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/General-Discussion-f5171242.html ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
the bing imagery is from 2016, but i live where i map. From: Joseph Eisenberg Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2019 10:08 PM To: Yves Cc: osm Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page I've finished the new detailed page "Keep the History" And so I've removed the two paragraphs about specific JOSM plugins and a way to move a node to a new area from the Good_practice page - they are on the new page which is linked https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history I would also like to move "Check the history of important objects" to the new page, since I think it is redundant on Good practice where it's mentioned in "Do not trace from outdated imagery" But I'm still waiting to hear back from the original author who added this section at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Good_practice#Section:_.22Check_the_history_of_important_objects.22 : Joseph On 7/4/19, Joseph Eisenberg < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com > wrote: > As mentioned, I plan to significantly shorten the "Keep the history" > section, with a link to the longer version at > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history instead. > > I would probably support shortening the page even further, but I've > already had several edits reverted by other users who are in favor of > including various sections. > > On 7/4/19, Yves < yve...@mailbox.org > wrote: >> Hmm... I would be all in favor of extending the See also... section and >> shorten drastically the page to keep it simple. >> Some of the good practices there are second order, don't you think? >> Keeping history compared to Tag for the renderer, for example. >> Yves >> >> Le 4 juillet 2019 05:53:23 GMT+02:00, Joseph Eisenberg >> < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com > a écrit : >>>I've reordered and reworded several sections of the Good practice >>>page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice >>> >>>The page had grown over the years from 6 or 7 initial sections: >>>(First verion of page in 2008 >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=86242 ) >>> >>>1) Don't map for the renderer >>>2) One feature, one OSM-object >>>3) Keep straight ways straight >>>4) Map what's on the ground >>>5)a) Don't remove tags you don't understand >>> b) Document your custom-tags >>>6) Do correct errors >>> >>>Now there were 22 different sections, several added this past year >>>without discussion, and they were not organized: >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=1861565 >>> >>>I've reordered and categorized these sections under 7 main headings: >>> >>>1 Do correct errors >>>2 Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic >>>events, temporary features, local legislation etc) >>>3 Don't map for the renderer (+ Don't misuse name tag) >>>4 Good changeset comments (+Keep the history) >>>5 One feature, one OSM element >>>6 Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not >>>trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark >>>estimations with FIXME ... etc.) >>>7 Document your custom-tags (Don't remove tags that you don't >>>understand... >>> >>>I've made some wording changes for more consistent and concise style, >>>and removed some examples (eg abandoned railways) >>> >>>I've removed 2 sections added in the past year: >>> >>>"Don't map insignificant, perishable and mobile objects" >>>- this section duplicated information in the exiting heading about >>>temporary features >>> >>>"Don't censor anything existing in reality for any reason. Avoid >>>interpolations if there is sufficient imagery." >>>- This seems redundant and the part about censoring data isn't >>>completely correct. We don't add personal info about who lives in a >>>private house, for example. >>> >>>While I haven't done this yet, I would also recommend moving the long >>>details about "Keep the history", involving how to use specific >>>editors and checking history in certain editors, along with the >>>section "Check the history of important objects" which duplicates >>>advice in the Aerial Imagery section, to a new page, with a link: >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history >>> >>>Joseph Eisenberg, User:Jeisenbe >>> >>>___ >>>talk mailing list >>>talk@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> > ___ 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] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
I've finished the new detailed page "Keep the History" And so I've removed the two paragraphs about specific JOSM plugins and a way to move a node to a new area from the Good_practice page - they are on the new page which is linked https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history I would also like to move "Check the history of important objects" to the new page, since I think it is redundant on Good practice where it's mentioned in "Do not trace from outdated imagery" But I'm still waiting to hear back from the original author who added this section at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Good_practice#Section:_.22Check_the_history_of_important_objects.22: Joseph On 7/4/19, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > As mentioned, I plan to significantly shorten the "Keep the history" > section, with a link to the longer version at > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history instead. > > I would probably support shortening the page even further, but I've > already had several edits reverted by other users who are in favor of > including various sections. > > On 7/4/19, Yves wrote: >> Hmm... I would be all in favor of extending the See also... section and >> shorten drastically the page to keep it simple. >> Some of the good practices there are second order, don't you think? >> Keeping history compared to Tag for the renderer, for example. >> Yves >> >> Le 4 juillet 2019 05:53:23 GMT+02:00, Joseph Eisenberg >> a écrit : >>>I've reordered and reworded several sections of the Good practice >>>page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice >>> >>>The page had grown over the years from 6 or 7 initial sections: >>>(First verion of page in 2008 >>>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=86242) >>> >>>1) Don't map for the renderer >>>2) One feature, one OSM-object >>>3) Keep straight ways straight >>>4) Map what's on the ground >>>5)a) Don't remove tags you don't understand >>> b) Document your custom-tags >>>6) Do correct errors >>> >>>Now there were 22 different sections, several added this past year >>>without discussion, and they were not organized: >>>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=1861565 >>> >>>I've reordered and categorized these sections under 7 main headings: >>> >>>1Do correct errors >>>2Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic >>>events, temporary features, local legislation etc) >>>3Don't map for the renderer (+ Don't misuse name tag) >>>4Good changeset comments (+Keep the history) >>>5One feature, one OSM element >>>6Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not >>>trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark >>>estimations with FIXME ... etc.) >>>7Document your custom-tags (Don't remove tags that you don't >>>understand... >>> >>>I've made some wording changes for more consistent and concise style, >>>and removed some examples (eg abandoned railways) >>> >>>I've removed 2 sections added in the past year: >>> >>>"Don't map insignificant, perishable and mobile objects" >>>- this section duplicated information in the exiting heading about >>>temporary features >>> >>>"Don't censor anything existing in reality for any reason. Avoid >>>interpolations if there is sufficient imagery." >>>- This seems redundant and the part about censoring data isn't >>>completely correct. We don't add personal info about who lives in a >>>private house, for example. >>> >>>While I haven't done this yet, I would also recommend moving the long >>>details about "Keep the history", involving how to use specific >>>editors and checking history in certain editors, along with the >>>section "Check the history of important objects" which duplicates >>>advice in the Aerial Imagery section, to a new page, with a link: >>>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history >>> >>>Joseph Eisenberg, User:Jeisenbe >>> >>>___ >>>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] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
Re: "Try to keep changesets to a manageable size, both in number of changes and geographical scope." This would be good to add to "Good changeset comments" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments If a changeset covers a huge are or too many changes, it won't be easy to understand the comments in the future. It's not usually a problem for iD users, since you get a warning when over 100 objects have been edited and it's hard to scroll around too far, but it happens with JOSM and imports. Many of the issues with too large changesets are related to imports and mechanical edits, which are not currently discussed on this Good_practice page but have separate pages: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines On 7/5/19, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 05/07/19 05:54, Jmapb wrote: >> On 7/4/2019 12:40 AM, Warin wrote: >>> On the order of things. >>> >>> Best to tell them what to do first. This provides some motivation. >>> >>> Leave 'what not to do' for last, these tend to turn people away. >>> >>> So I would do: >>> >>> 1One feature, one OSM element >>> >>> 2Good changeset comments (+Keep the history) >>> >>> 3Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not >>> trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark >>> estimations with FIXME ... etc.) >>> >>> 4Do correct errors >>> >>> 5Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic >>> events, temporary features, local legislation etc) >>> >>> 6Document your custom-tags (Don't remove tags that you don't >>> understand... >>> >>> 7Don't map for the renderer (+ Don't misuse name tag) >> >> I'd personally advocate for one more "don't" -- But it can be phrased as >> a "do" if that helps the psychology: >> >> "Try to keep changesets to a manageable size, both in number of changes >> and geographical scope." >> >> I believe this is commonly understood best practice, but it's only >> vaguely documented. > > +1 .. and guilty of it too (in my early days). > > > > ___ > 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] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
You are right. I've moved "Don't map temporary events and temporary features" to it's own main heading after Verifiability. I believe "Map what's on the ground", "Don't map historic events" and "Don't map your local legislation..." are clearly related to verifiability. The later two reference "verifiability" in the text, and "Map what's on the ground" is related, because the text of a sign or other real-world object is easier to verify than the accuracy of old maps. On 7/5/19, Tobias Knerr wrote: > On 04.07.19 05:53, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: >> 2Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic >> events, temporary features, local legislation etc) > > In my opinion, the practices that you've turned into subheadings of the > verifiability section are not merely special cases of verifiability. > > For example, temporary features are perfectly verifiable (until they > cease to exist, of course). The reasons why it's not usually considered > good practice to map them include the unsustainable maintenance effort > and the impact on offline use of our data. > > So I feel these items are really their own separate practices, not part > of verifiability. If you want to avoid having too many top-level > headings, you might still be able to group the three "Don't map..." > rules into a common section. > > ___ > 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] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
On 05/07/19 05:54, Jmapb wrote: On 7/4/2019 12:40 AM, Warin wrote: On the order of things. Best to tell them what to do first. This provides some motivation. Leave 'what not to do' for last, these tend to turn people away. So I would do: 1 One feature, one OSM element 2 Good changeset comments (+Keep the history) 3 Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark estimations with FIXME ... etc.) 4 Do correct errors 5 Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic events, temporary features, local legislation etc) 6 Document your custom-tags (Don't remove tags that you don't understand... 7 Don't map for the renderer (+ Don't misuse name tag) I'd personally advocate for one more "don't" -- But it can be phrased as a "do" if that helps the psychology: "Try to keep changesets to a manageable size, both in number of changes and geographical scope." I believe this is commonly understood best practice, but it's only vaguely documented. +1 .. and guilty of it too (in my early days). ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
On 7/4/2019 12:40 AM, Warin wrote: On the order of things. Best to tell them what to do first. This provides some motivation. Leave 'what not to do' for last, these tend to turn people away. So I would do: 1 One feature, one OSM element 2 Good changeset comments (+Keep the history) 3 Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark estimations with FIXME ... etc.) 4 Do correct errors 5 Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic events, temporary features, local legislation etc) 6 Document your custom-tags (Don't remove tags that you don't understand... 7 Don't map for the renderer (+ Don't misuse name tag) I'd personally advocate for one more "don't" -- But it can be phrased as a "do" if that helps the psychology: "Try to keep changesets to a manageable size, both in number of changes and geographical scope." I believe this is commonly understood best practice, but it's only vaguely documented. Jason ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
On 04.07.19 05:53, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > 2 Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic > events, temporary features, local legislation etc) In my opinion, the practices that you've turned into subheadings of the verifiability section are not merely special cases of verifiability. For example, temporary features are perfectly verifiable (until they cease to exist, of course). The reasons why it's not usually considered good practice to map them include the unsustainable maintenance effort and the impact on offline use of our data. So I feel these items are really their own separate practices, not part of verifiability. If you want to avoid having too many top-level headings, you might still be able to group the three "Don't map..." rules into a common section. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
On 04.07.19 05:53, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I've reordered and reworded several sections of the Good practice page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice On 04.07.2019 11:27, Frederik Ramm wrote: I would prefer if far-reaching edits to essential pages that describe a community consensus would be made on a user page first so we can discuss, rather than applying the "be bold" motto here. That would also avoid dozens of small editorial edits, going back and forth, among the structural ones. This is not to criticise the edits you made, just a matter of principle. In fact I find our edits make sense and generally improve the page. Well, I do criticize that paragraphs, which have been restored after your removal, and a reason was given in the comment for restoring, is being removed again in a later edit, following you personal opinion. Please don't start edit wars. tom ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
Hi, On 04.07.19 05:53, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > I've reordered and reworded several sections of the Good practice > page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice I would prefer if far-reaching edits to essential pages that describe a community consensus would be made on a user page first so we can discuss, rather than applying the "be bold" motto here. While now discuss your changes, new users will see your version and think it is somehow agreed on, when indeed it is just your idea of how it should be. Of course this also applies to everyone else who added stuff before you. This is not to criticise the edits you made, just a matter of principle. In fact I find our edits make sense and generally improve the page. One pet peeve I often have on the Wiki, and I think it is something brought in by Wikipedia users, is over-use of linking. When I read a sentence like: "The name tag should ... not describe or label the feature" and there is a hyperlink behind "describe", then I expect that hyperlink to be pertinent to the situation being discussed (e.g. a link to a page that explains how a name would describe a feature). I would not expect a generic link to a definition of the word "describe" or, as you put it, a link to the tag "description" - that's not helpful here, unnecessarily disrupts the reading flow, and even confusing when someone clicks on it. 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] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
It should be 'Don't map *incorrectly* to suit the renderer' All tags can be used for rendering otherwise we'd just have black dots & lines. DaveF On 04/07/2019 04:53, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: I've reordered and reworded several sections of the Good practice page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice The page had grown over the years from 6 or 7 initial sections: (First verion of page in 2008 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=86242) 1) Don't map for the renderer 2) One feature, one OSM-object 3) Keep straight ways straight 4) Map what's on the ground 5)a) Don't remove tags you don't understand b) Document your custom-tags 6) Do correct errors Now there were 22 different sections, several added this past year without discussion, and they were not organized: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=1861565 I've reordered and categorized these sections under 7 main headings: 1 Do correct errors 2 Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic events, temporary features, local legislation etc) 3 Don't map for the renderer (+ Don't misuse name tag) 4 Good changeset comments (+Keep the history) 5 One feature, one OSM element 6 Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark estimations with FIXME ... etc.) 7 Document your custom-tags (Don't remove tags that you don't understand... I've made some wording changes for more consistent and concise style, and removed some examples (eg abandoned railways) I've removed 2 sections added in the past year: "Don't map insignificant, perishable and mobile objects" - this section duplicated information in the exiting heading about temporary features "Don't censor anything existing in reality for any reason. Avoid interpolations if there is sufficient imagery." - This seems redundant and the part about censoring data isn't completely correct. We don't add personal info about who lives in a private house, for example. While I haven't done this yet, I would also recommend moving the long details about "Keep the history", involving how to use specific editors and checking history in certain editors, along with the section "Check the history of important objects" which duplicates advice in the Aerial Imagery section, to a new page, with a link: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history Joseph Eisenberg, User:Jeisenbe ___ 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] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
sent from a phone > On 4. Jul 2019, at 06:40, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 3Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not > trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark > estimations with FIXME ... etc.) I would remove the align imagery part, it is typically not clear for a mapper which is the correct alignment of imagery and it is also not only a question of misalignment but also of imagery distortion, which we cannot do anything about anyway. Cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
On the order of things. Best to tell them what to do first. This provides some motivation. Leave 'what not to do' for last, these tend to turn people away. So I would do: 1 One feature, one OSM element 2 Good changeset comments (+Keep the history) 3 Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark estimations with FIXME ... etc.) 4 Do correct errors 5 Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic events, temporary features, local legislation etc) 6 Document your custom-tags (Don't remove tags that you don't understand... 7 Don't map for the renderer (+ Don't misuse name tag) On 04/07/19 14:15, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: As mentioned, I plan to significantly shorten the "Keep the history" section, with a link to the longer version at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history instead. I would probably support shortening the page even further, but I've already had several edits reverted by other users who are in favor of including various sections. On 7/4/19, Yves wrote: Hmm... I would be all in favor of extending the See also... section and shorten drastically the page to keep it simple. Some of the good practices there are second order, don't you think? Keeping history compared to Tag for the renderer, for example. Yves Le 4 juillet 2019 05:53:23 GMT+02:00, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : I've reordered and reworded several sections of the Good practice page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice The page had grown over the years from 6 or 7 initial sections: (First verion of page in 2008 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=86242) 1) Don't map for the renderer 2) One feature, one OSM-object 3) Keep straight ways straight 4) Map what's on the ground 5)a) Don't remove tags you don't understand b) Document your custom-tags 6) Do correct errors Now there were 22 different sections, several added this past year without discussion, and they were not organized: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=1861565 I've reordered and categorized these sections under 7 main headings: 1 Do correct errors 2 Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic events, temporary features, local legislation etc) 3 Don't map for the renderer (+ Don't misuse name tag) 4 Good changeset comments (+Keep the history) 5 One feature, one OSM element 6 Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark estimations with FIXME ... etc.) 7 Document your custom-tags (Don't remove tags that you don't understand... I've made some wording changes for more consistent and concise style, and removed some examples (eg abandoned railways) I've removed 2 sections added in the past year: "Don't map insignificant, perishable and mobile objects" - this section duplicated information in the exiting heading about temporary features "Don't censor anything existing in reality for any reason. Avoid interpolations if there is sufficient imagery." - This seems redundant and the part about censoring data isn't completely correct. We don't add personal info about who lives in a private house, for example. While I haven't done this yet, I would also recommend moving the long details about "Keep the history", involving how to use specific editors and checking history in certain editors, along with the section "Check the history of important objects" which duplicates advice in the Aerial Imagery section, to a new page, with a link: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history Joseph Eisenberg, User:Jeisenbe ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ 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] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
As mentioned, I plan to significantly shorten the "Keep the history" section, with a link to the longer version at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history instead. I would probably support shortening the page even further, but I've already had several edits reverted by other users who are in favor of including various sections. On 7/4/19, Yves wrote: > Hmm... I would be all in favor of extending the See also... section and > shorten drastically the page to keep it simple. > Some of the good practices there are second order, don't you think? > Keeping history compared to Tag for the renderer, for example. > Yves > > Le 4 juillet 2019 05:53:23 GMT+02:00, Joseph Eisenberg > a écrit : >>I've reordered and reworded several sections of the Good practice >>page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice >> >>The page had grown over the years from 6 or 7 initial sections: >>(First verion of page in 2008 >>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=86242) >> >>1) Don't map for the renderer >>2) One feature, one OSM-object >>3) Keep straight ways straight >>4) Map what's on the ground >>5)a) Don't remove tags you don't understand >> b) Document your custom-tags >>6) Do correct errors >> >>Now there were 22 different sections, several added this past year >>without discussion, and they were not organized: >>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=1861565 >> >>I've reordered and categorized these sections under 7 main headings: >> >>1 Do correct errors >>2 Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic >>events, temporary features, local legislation etc) >>3 Don't map for the renderer (+ Don't misuse name tag) >>4 Good changeset comments (+Keep the history) >>5 One feature, one OSM element >>6 Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not >>trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark >>estimations with FIXME ... etc.) >>7 Document your custom-tags (Don't remove tags that you don't >>understand... >> >>I've made some wording changes for more consistent and concise style, >>and removed some examples (eg abandoned railways) >> >>I've removed 2 sections added in the past year: >> >>"Don't map insignificant, perishable and mobile objects" >>- this section duplicated information in the exiting heading about >>temporary features >> >>"Don't censor anything existing in reality for any reason. Avoid >>interpolations if there is sufficient imagery." >>- This seems redundant and the part about censoring data isn't >>completely correct. We don't add personal info about who lives in a >>private house, for example. >> >>While I haven't done this yet, I would also recommend moving the long >>details about "Keep the history", involving how to use specific >>editors and checking history in certain editors, along with the >>section "Check the history of important objects" which duplicates >>advice in the Aerial Imagery section, to a new page, with a link: >>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history >> >>Joseph Eisenberg, User:Jeisenbe >> >>___ >>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] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
Hmm... I would be all in favor of extending the See also... section and shorten drastically the page to keep it simple. Some of the good practices there are second order, don't you think? Keeping history compared to Tag for the renderer, for example. Yves Le 4 juillet 2019 05:53:23 GMT+02:00, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit : >I've reordered and reworded several sections of the Good practice >page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice > >The page had grown over the years from 6 or 7 initial sections: >(First verion of page in 2008 >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=86242) > >1) Don't map for the renderer >2) One feature, one OSM-object >3) Keep straight ways straight >4) Map what's on the ground >5)a) Don't remove tags you don't understand > b) Document your custom-tags >6) Do correct errors > >Now there were 22 different sections, several added this past year >without discussion, and they were not organized: >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=1861565 > >I've reordered and categorized these sections under 7 main headings: > >1 Do correct errors >2 Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic >events, temporary features, local legislation etc) >3 Don't map for the renderer (+ Don't misuse name tag) >4 Good changeset comments (+Keep the history) >5 One feature, one OSM element >6 Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not >trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark >estimations with FIXME ... etc.) >7 Document your custom-tags (Don't remove tags that you don't >understand... > >I've made some wording changes for more consistent and concise style, >and removed some examples (eg abandoned railways) > >I've removed 2 sections added in the past year: > >"Don't map insignificant, perishable and mobile objects" >- this section duplicated information in the exiting heading about >temporary features > >"Don't censor anything existing in reality for any reason. Avoid >interpolations if there is sufficient imagery." >- This seems redundant and the part about censoring data isn't >completely correct. We don't add personal info about who lives in a >private house, for example. > >While I haven't done this yet, I would also recommend moving the long >details about "Keep the history", involving how to use specific >editors and checking history in certain editors, along with the >section "Check the history of important objects" which duplicates >advice in the Aerial Imagery section, to a new page, with a link: >https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history > >Joseph Eisenberg, User:Jeisenbe > >___ >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] Reordering and rewriting Good Practice wiki page
I've reordered and reworded several sections of the Good practice page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice The page had grown over the years from 6 or 7 initial sections: (First verion of page in 2008 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=86242) 1) Don't map for the renderer 2) One feature, one OSM-object 3) Keep straight ways straight 4) Map what's on the ground 5)a) Don't remove tags you don't understand b) Document your custom-tags 6) Do correct errors Now there were 22 different sections, several added this past year without discussion, and they were not organized: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Good_practice=1861565 I've reordered and categorized these sections under 7 main headings: 1 Do correct errors 2 Verifiability (+Map what's on the ground, Don't map: historic events, temporary features, local legislation etc) 3 Don't map for the renderer (+ Don't misuse name tag) 4 Good changeset comments (+Keep the history) 5 One feature, one OSM element 6 Editing Standards: (Align aerial imagery before tracing, Do not trace from outdated imagery... Keep straight ways straight ... Mark estimations with FIXME ... etc.) 7 Document your custom-tags (Don't remove tags that you don't understand... I've made some wording changes for more consistent and concise style, and removed some examples (eg abandoned railways) I've removed 2 sections added in the past year: "Don't map insignificant, perishable and mobile objects" - this section duplicated information in the exiting heading about temporary features "Don't censor anything existing in reality for any reason. Avoid interpolations if there is sufficient imagery." - This seems redundant and the part about censoring data isn't completely correct. We don't add personal info about who lives in a private house, for example. While I haven't done this yet, I would also recommend moving the long details about "Keep the history", involving how to use specific editors and checking history in certain editors, along with the section "Check the history of important objects" which duplicates advice in the Aerial Imagery section, to a new page, with a link: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history Joseph Eisenberg, User:Jeisenbe ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
