Richard Fairhurst wrote:
But around here in rural Charlbury, that kind of information is absolutely
crucial when mapping bridleways. As someone on the wiki pointed out, though,
the smoothness tag as currently conceived is near as dammit useless for
these because it offers no chance for
Nop schrieb:
Hi!
Pieren schrieb:
I would suggest the following changes in the wiki:
- replace vote by opinion poll
- replace I approve/I oppose by I like it/I don't like it
... and add - as already discussed - I don't mind but not against it
- replace approved feature status by valuable
Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Hi Guys,
I would love to start mapping, and have used both both the JOSM editor and
Potlatch a small amount, and found the tags the most complicated feature. I
can cope with nodes, open closed ways etc no problem, but understanding
Streichung - ohne Verhandlung ... höflich?
Regards to ALL of my colleagues
Mike Harris
-Original Message-
From: Erik Johansson [mailto:e...@kth.se]
Sent: 31 January 2009 12:03
To: Richard Fairhurst
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009
tongue.
Mike Harris
-Original Message-
From: Sebastian Hohmann [mailto:m...@s-hohmann.de]
Sent: 31 January 2009 14:50
To: Frederik Ramm
Cc: talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Frederik Ramm schrieb:
Hi,
Nop wrote:
I would consider it the basic principle of democracy
Richard Fairhurst schrieb:
Frederik Ramm wrote:
the German community takes offence at user:chriscf's deletion
of the smoothness voting result from approved features and
moving it to rejected features in spite of of there having been
a proper vote with an approved outcome.
Then the
Ah, the edit war on the wiki is back.
Chris has had the courage of his convictions to stand up against an utterly
ridiculous tag,
ridiculous tag, I agree. But I see a long list of other ridiculous
tags in the db and in the wiki. Do you need examples ?
thereby pointing out the flaws in a
Hi!
Richard Fairhurst schrieb:
Chris has had the courage of his convictions to stand up against an utterly
ridiculous tag, thereby pointing out the flaws in a voting system which a
lot of us are silently unhappy with. Good luck to him.
Maybe I am misreading your lines, but to me they sound
(Nop's e-mail went to me rather than the list but I'm guessing that
was a mistake - and he probably expressed the other side best)
Nop wrote:
I would consider it the basic principle of democracy/a community
that things established by vote need to be changed by vote, even if
the need for
Pieren schrieb:
The problem here is that Chriscf just wants to avoid that this tag is
used by others and never proposed some alternative solutions.
The current voting is 19 yes and 10 no.
If Chriscf cannot convince at least another 10 people to oppose this
proposal, he must face the fact that
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Richard Fairhurst
rich...@systemed.net wrote:
I'm starting to wonder about a Tags I Use system.
How should I tag this is one of the most commonly asked questions.
The wiki vote system works as a good system for commenting on
proposals,you system does not help
I think mapfeatures is the problem. Not only socially (this tag must
be in mapfeatures) but technically (wikiload). So remove mapfeatures
as first step.
Very wrong. It is the only way for a newbie to have the slightest idea on
how to tag anything.
IMHO, the problem is too much democracy. 29
2009/1/31 Sven Rautenberg s...@rtbg.de:
Pieren schrieb:
The problem here is that Chriscf just wants to avoid that this tag is
used by others and never proposed some alternative solutions.
The current voting is 19 yes and 10 no.
If Chriscf cannot convince at least another 10 people to oppose
Richard Fairhurst schrieb:
With smoothness that's gone out of the window. As far as I'm
concerned, with the approval of smoothness=very_horrible (come
_on_!), all bets are off. The voting system has just voted itself
into irrelevance.
I take it that you oppose this tag. Why haven't you
Hi Guys,
I would love to start mapping, and have used both both the JOSM editor
and Potlatch a small amount, and found the tags the most complicated
feature. I can cope with nodes, open closed ways etc no problem, but
understanding the difference between all the tags and using the right
tags
Hi!
Richard Fairhurst schrieb:
(Nop's e-mail went to me rather than the list but I'm guessing that was
a mistake - and he probably expressed the other side best)
Well, this is the crux of it. I'm not convinced the form of democracy we
have in the tag voting is at all helpful.
The
What I like about the tag voting system is the discussion. The
discussion pages around a tag proposal are often quite useful - often
more so than the main page on the tag. The number of times a tag
proposal has been improved from the original proposal after discussion
suggests that any system
Features. Also, they'll only do that if they're trying to add
something that doesn't seem to be in Potlatch's drop-down lists.
Probably very true. That makes the editors holding at least as much power
as the wiki features page.
___
talk mailing
Hi,
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
The problem is that people vote on tags:
- without knowing anything about the subject
- without ever having mapped the feature in question
- without any intention of ever mapping the feature in question
This is my main complaint about the voting system too. But
Hi,
Nop wrote:
I would consider it the basic principle of democracy/a community that
things established by vote need to be changed by vote, even if the need
for change is obvious.
Democracy usually means that the vote results decide something. (At
least in its textbook form it does.)
This
Frederik Ramm schrieb:
Hi,
Nop wrote:
I would consider it the basic principle of democracy/a community that
things established by vote need to be changed by vote, even if the need
for change is obvious.
Democracy usually means that the vote results decide something. (At
least in its
Frederik Ramm wrote:
This is my main complaint about the voting system too. But
in the specific case of smoothness, it seems to me that
there is probably nobody here who can be said to not know
anything about the subject
Disagree strongly - it depends entirely where you're mapping. I
Erik Johansson wrote:
How should I tag this is one of the most commonly asked
questions. The wiki vote system works as a good system for
commenting on proposals,you system does not help this.
Sure it does - Talk: pages. Or even a tagging@ list. You don't need a system
to have discussion, it
Sven Rautenberg wrote:
I take it that you oppose this tag. Why haven't you said so in
the voting section until now?
For the same reason that no-one on talk-de ever submits any patches to
Potlatch?
( :) too)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
Pieren Pieren wrote:
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
The problem is that people vote on tags:
- without knowing anything about the subject
- without ever having mapped the feature in question
- without any intention of ever mapping the feature in question
Wow, then you are against the principle of
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Erik Johansson wrote:
How should I tag this is one of the most commonly asked
questions. The wiki vote system works as a good system for
commenting on proposals,you system does not help this.
Sure it does - Talk:
Nop wrote:
Well, you are proposing a differnt kind of vote by usage of tags.
Not solely. Lemme explain.
At present, we have Tagwatch, which just lists usage per tag. I'm suggesting
(just as a half-baked idea) that we have a sort of floaty
cloud-Tagwatch-on-steroids. So you might have:
Hi!
Richard Fairhurst schrieb:
Sven Rautenberg wrote:
I take it that you oppose this tag. Why haven't you said so in
the voting section until now?
For the same reason that no-one on talk-de ever submits any patches to
Potlatch?
They don't patch.
But they also don't object to other
Nop schrieb:
- Newbie is enthusiastic, wants to contribute and studies the Wiki
- After a little mapping, he has an idea, finds the proposal system and
spends a lot of time working out a nice proposal, discussing and
refining it
- Then comes the point he finds out that all this work doesn't
Nop schrieb:
- Newbie is enthusiastic, wants to contribute and studies the Wiki
- After a little mapping, he has an idea, finds the proposal system
and
spends a lot of time working out a nice proposal, discussing and
refining it
- Then comes the point he finds out that all this work
I would suggest the following changes in the wiki:
- replace vote by opinion poll
- replace I approve/I oppose by I like it/I don't like it
- replace approved feature status by valuable
- split the map features page in two parts core map features for
well established tags (e.g. used by more thant
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
Disagree strongly - it depends entirely where you're mapping. I doubt I've
ever come across anywhere where smoothness= might be relevant while mapping
Burton-on-Trent (well, maybe one road which the flipping Gas
Richard Fairhurst skrev:
The important thing is that there is no prescription. No rejected. No
approved. Just easy-to-use documentation of what people are using, why. If
you feel a need for a particular tag, start using it, and document it. If
the tag is good, it'll catch on. It's much more
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se wrote:
Pieren wrote:
I would suggest the following changes in the wiki:
- replace vote by opinion poll
This would probably be a step in the right direction. But why
have a poll at all, where you count the number of
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 05:45:11PM +, Thomas Wood wrote:
2009/1/31 Pieren pier...@gmail.com:
I would suggest the following changes in the wiki:
- replace vote by opinion poll
- replace I approve/I oppose by I like it/I don't like it
- replace approved feature status by valuable
-
Hi!
Russ Nelson schrieb:
Is there any voluntary community in which this does not happen? There
will always be people who have good ideas who are unable to convince
other people of the correctness of their ideas. See, for example,
Galileo.
The point was that those people are being
Hi!
Pieren schrieb:
I would suggest the following changes in the wiki:
- replace vote by opinion poll
- replace I approve/I oppose by I like it/I don't like it
- replace approved feature status by valuable
- split the map features page in two parts core map features for
well established
Hi!
Lars Aronsson schrieb:
I would suggest the following changes in the wiki:
- replace vote by opinion poll
This would probably be a step in the right direction. But why
have a poll at all, where you count the number of people/votes?
Wouldn't it be better to ask for a number of
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 07:01:17PM +0100, Lars Aronsson wrote:
Wouldn't it be better to ask for a number of arguments for or
against a proposal? Then people would have to contribute more
arguments, instead of more votes.
This is ultimately more desirable. Wikipedia has a policy that
Le 31 janv. 09 à 19:23, Pieren a écrit :
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se
wrote:
Pieren wrote:
I would suggest the following changes in the wiki:
- replace vote by opinion poll
This would probably be a step in the right direction. But why
have a poll at
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se wrote:
Among the arguments could be: This or that tag is already used in
X number of places in OSM.
That kind of crazy idea gets you nowhere against the wiki-fiddlers,
c.f. previous discussions regarding crossing=
Cheers,
Andy
Hi,
the German community takes offence at user:chriscf's deletion of the
smoothness voting result from approved features and moving it to
rejected features in spite of of there having been a proper vote with
an approved outcome.
The page Proposed_features/Smoothness still calls this
Frederik Ramm wrote:
the German community takes offence at user:chriscf's deletion
of the smoothness voting result from approved features and
moving it to rejected features in spite of of there having been
a proper vote with an approved outcome.
Then the German community should come
43 matches
Mail list logo
