Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 differentiating between winter and > summer. There's a very good reason for that: Seasonal changes are not a generally solved problem in OSM, and so smoothness doesn't solve it. Compare the "access" tag series. Similarly, I could say "the access tag is useless because it offers no chance for differentiating between winter and summer". Many trails and some roads have different access in summer vs. winter. But does that mean that the whole access system is useless? No! Some other new system will be needed to handle seasonal differentiation, and it'll need to handle seasonal differentiation of all kinds of features. Tacking it onto an unrelated tag would be a mistake. -Alex Mauer "hawke" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > Thomas Wood wrote: > >> 2009/1/31 Pieren : >> >>> 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" >>> >> I like it, but maybe replace valuable with recommended? >> > > +1 for the modified idea. > > We definitely need to get the idea out of newcomer's heads that to be a > proper OSM member you need to have written at least one proposal... This is a practical suggestion. We can actually put it into effect today. It will take quite a few hours of wiki fiddling to swap all mention of "approved" for "recommended" though. Is it worth doing? I don't think it will solve the problem completely, because people will still see it for what it is, a vote on whether a tagging idea gets to be put on "Map Features", but the rewording might help make people see it as more of a process of gaining community acceptance rather than just winning a vote. Harry Wood ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Well, I've just opened a wiki page[1] to try to gather some users who have ideas and other devs who can join me on this "hopeless" task :) I will post there some other ideas for analysis, integration with existent tools and database diagrams. Feel free to participate and give suggestions. Will post in the dev list and talk-it to ask also, if someone wants to help please "advertise" this effort also in every own language mailing list and point them there. Probably is too much work for me to handle alone in my spare time, but together we can try to! :) Mario Ferraro [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Featurama Dave Stubbs ha scritto: > Absolutely. > > The main advantage of the wiki is that it's already developed > software. If we had a dedicated web app which was actually geared from > the start to allow discussion on tagging it would make things a lot > easier. But only really if it could cope with having more than one tag > solution for a problem, and was properly dynamic -- ie: people can > change their minds. A web app doing something similar to Richard's > Tags_I_Use suggestion would be awesome. > > If you've got the time then I'd say go for it :-) > > Dave > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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" ... I would prefer "recommended" >> - split the map features page in two parts "core map features" for >> well established tags (e.g. used by more thant 50% of the >> contributors) and another map features page for the rest. > > This would be a considerable improvement. Splitting map features into > established by mass use and suggestions would help a lot. > Please do not split up the map features page! We already have the key pages showing a feature in more detail, my feeling is splitting it up further is adding confusion and in the end won't help a lot. What might make more sense is to add the "discussion status" to the entries, e.g. something like: "widely used", "rarely used" or "under heavy discussion" (just an example, don't mind the exact phrases). This could be done with a new text column or the use of specific background colors. This doesn't solve the real problem. But at least indicates better where there's no real consensus. Regards, ULFL ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
"Proposed" and then either "Default Recommendation" or "Alternative Tagging" - with the last of these tags having a link to a, perhaps pre-existing, default - ? Problem is that my proposal - or any other - will always be dependent on the mother tongue of the reader. We probably should pay more attention when discussing a tag to the question of possible ambiguities or misinterpretation that could arise in translation - and then think about alternative wording. Some discussions have done this - and we clearly benefit from a number of veterans whose English is outstanding even if not their mother 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/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 is not true in OSM; we have votes, but they are never more than > an "indication". Our votes should perhaps better be called "straw polls". > Anyone can use a tag that has been rejected in such a poll, and > sometimes it gets even built into the renderers, and vice versa. > Indeed, but the whole system suggests otherwise. When reading the wiki and listening to what many other people write about the proposal and voting system, you have to think that the whole thing means something. The terms 'Accepted' and 'Rejected' are one example for that. They sound like they are much more than an indication. Even though no Proposal can really be 'rejected' in OSM (you can still use it if you want), almost everyone who will read 'rejected feature' will probably refrain from using the proposal. I would prefer if there weren't any 'Accepted' or 'Rejected' proposal, but only 'Proposed' that are open for discussion and 'Finished' (or some better term) that have the details worked out so far, so you can be sure that they don't change completely over night. > If we would just ignore the whole process saying that nobody cares > anyway, that would be much more to my liking. > But that should also be documented on the wiki. We can't expect that people abandon or understand the proposal system, when the wiki tells them otherwise. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Andy I'm basically in agreement ... Good contribution to the debate ... this is beginning to get constructive ... Obviously we're not hard core enough, you and I. Mike Harris -Original Message- From: Andy Deakin [mailto:andy.dea...@pcmend.net] Sent: 31 January 2009 12:39 To: Talk 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 the difference between all the tags and using the right tags in the right place requires either remembering all the tags, or looking them up each time. I find this hard, and having some central place I can go to see all the different tags is essential. (Although I think that the Map_Features page would benefit from being split up a bit, it is huge!) Anyway, back to the topic. 29 votes on a feature is pretty poor, when the stats on OSM state that there are 88994 users. How do we engage people like me? I would like to but have never voted on anything on OSM. It is no wonder 'hard-core' osmers ignore the results of a vote consisting of 0.03% of the community. Is there (or could there be) a weekly or monthly newsletter informing of changes that week/month and proposing any new tags? This talk mailing list gets far too many emails to expect everyone to monitor, but a monthly mailshot with bare bones of what is happening (current stats, perhaps special thanks to major contributors that month etc) together with proposed tags, closing dates, bullet points arguments for and against each tag, with links to more details etc would help to keep me informed anyway. Finally, people who use the tags are more likely to have a better understanding of how the should be used, and so perhaps should have a greater say in matters. How about multiplying their vote by their contribution in the last year? If someone wants a dictatorship, you better get mapping! My 2 cents. Andy Sven Rautenberg wrote: > 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 said so in the > voting section until now? > > :) > > Regards, > Sven > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
As a relative newbie I am not going to get too involved in this debate but
would just make three simple comments:
1. When I was a complete newbie (mapper) I would probably never have
continued with this excellent osm project had there not been a mapfeatures
page ... I would have been completely lost as to how to proceed and would
have just given up. The community would have lost a keen mapper (as it's me
- perhaps no bad thing (;>). So, although I understand the thought behind
removing mapfeatures I would "vote" (??? (;>) ???) against the proposal
unless mapfeatures is replaced by something else (what?). Förlåt, Erik, det
är inte bra!
2. If we have a voting system - until we vote against it - we should use it.
To ignore it imho denies the most basic underlying principle of any wiki.
3. There might be merit in restricting voting to an enfranchised
sub-community - I would not dare to vote on most proposals, at least not
yet, because I feel I don't have enough understanding either of osm or of
the tag subject matter. It would be (very) imperfect but how about a pop
quiz for would-be voters that becomes available after, say, a year's active
use of the site? (:>?)
Sei einsieitig 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 at 12:47 PM, Richard Fairhurst
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 this.
Great idea, though it wont replace voting.
> I document it - maybe on the wiki
[...]
> Then, for those who like to have everything in a central place, once
> the tags have been used n times, they can go in Map Features.
I think mapfeatures is the problem. Not only socially ("this tag must be in
mapfeatures") but technically (wikiload). So remove mapfeatures as first
step.
--
/emj
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
2009/1/31 Nop : > Lars Aronsson schrieb: >> 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 arguments for or >> against a proposal? Then people would have to contribute more >> arguments, instead of more votes. > > I agree. A vote/poll with an argument attached has meaning. I approve. ;-) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On Jan 31, 2009, at 1:44 PM, Nop wrote: > > The frustrating part is spending a lot of time working out a > proposal, discussing it, actually convinving the people who joined > the discussion believing that the vote meant something. It does mean something. It just doesn't mean as much as you thought it might mean. In particular, it's not binding on anybody. They're more like what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. -- Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
2009/1/31 Mario Ferraro : > Hi all, > > I don't want to join the topic of this particular "vandalism", just a > little constructive proposal. Feel free to throw me lemons :) > > IMHO the wiki is and in the future will be more unlikely to handle > "smoothly" ;) the voting and the map features, and it's prone to > vandalism like the one we're talking about. > > What about a web application to handle all discussions and polls, that > think automatically about handling map features and all the related > things for the various communities? In that way we can handle the polls, > percentuals against total osm mappers, an eventual communication with > tag watch (and all the other rules we can imagine that could be sensible > for a feature approval) and that can be the all-inclusive reference > point for mappers to read features, propose announcements (RSS?) and > poll on them. It could output the map feature XML that is in current > development for applications. Furthermore, no way that a single person > can destroy everything with a single wiki edit. > > I know that it would not be so immediate to produce such an application, > but if it's not started somewhere out there by someone (don't really > know), I will love to start the development myself (if it seems sensible > for someone else than me :))... and obviously will love if some other > dev wants to join. > > We will just go on with the wiki and use the application when it will be > ready anytime in the future. > > Just exploring the general mood.. what do you think? > Absolutely. The main advantage of the wiki is that it's already developed software. If we had a dedicated web app which was actually geared from the start to allow discussion on tagging it would make things a lot easier. But only really if it could cope with having more than one tag solution for a problem, and was properly dynamic -- ie: people can change their minds. A web app doing something similar to Richard's Tags_I_Use suggestion would be awesome. If you've got the time then I'd say go for it :-) Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Hi all, I don't want to join the topic of this particular "vandalism", just a little constructive proposal. Feel free to throw me lemons :) IMHO the wiki is and in the future will be more unlikely to handle "smoothly" ;) the voting and the map features, and it's prone to vandalism like the one we're talking about. What about a web application to handle all discussions and polls, that think automatically about handling map features and all the related things for the various communities? In that way we can handle the polls, percentuals against total osm mappers, an eventual communication with tag watch (and all the other rules we can imagine that could be sensible for a feature approval) and that can be the all-inclusive reference point for mappers to read features, propose announcements (RSS?) and poll on them. It could output the map feature XML that is in current development for applications. Furthermore, no way that a single person can destroy everything with a single wiki edit. I know that it would not be so immediate to produce such an application, but if it's not started somewhere out there by someone (don't really know), I will love to start the development myself (if it seems sensible for someone else than me :))... and obviously will love if some other dev wants to join. We will just go on with the wiki and use the application when it will be ready anytime in the future. Just exploring the general mood.. what do you think? Mario Ferraro ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Lars Aronsson 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 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Le 31 janv. 09 à 19:23, Pieren a écrit : > On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Lars Aronsson > 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 people/votes? > > Like other polls, it gives an indication to the author to see if he's > going to the right direction or not with his proposal. And not only > hear from the opponents. While I appreciate the argument I don't see how it goes further to the RFC part of the life of a proposal. I mean, the role of RFC is to gather opinions about the proposal, and unlike a simple yes/no, it's supposed to be argued. In that light, if the vote is not used as an accept/reject tool, it's only a poor redundant tool to the RFC and I think it's not helping. Yann ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 discussion and reasoning are always most desirable when deciding on something, and polls are a last resort (though in practice they don’t seem to be). A problem with requiring reasoning is, ironically because you want people to think about their decision, making people think will just cause them not to participate. A poll can be indicative, with a lower barrier to entry, although it should be stressed that reasoning trumps it, and discussion is favourable. Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 arguments for or > against a proposal? Then people would have to contribute more > arguments, instead of more votes. I agree. A vote/poll with an argument attached has meaning. A quick yes/no without reasoning does not even tell you whether the voter read the page, let alone understood it. bye Nop ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 tags (e.g. used by more thant 50% of the > contributors) and another map features page for the rest. This would be a considerable improvement. Splitting map features into established by mass use and suggestions would help a lot. bye Nop ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 mislead by the Wiki that suggests there was more meaning to it. The frustrating part is spending a lot of time working out a proposal, discussing it, actually convinving the people who joined the discussion believing that the vote meant something. bye Nop ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Hi, Thomas Wood wrote: > 2009/1/31 Pieren : >> 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 50% of the >> contributors) and another map features page for the rest. > > I like it, but maybe replace valuable with recommended? +1 for the modified idea. We definitely need to get the idea out of newcomer's heads that to be a proper OSM member you need to have written at least one proposal... It seems to me that everyone, conciously or not, uses their first weeks with OSM to dig up the one spot where something could be mapped that isn't yet, and they think they do the project a service. We could do a flow chart: "Have you already mapped the object in question? No -> go to exit" ;-) I would also like to point out that I but a very cautionary note on "Proposed Features" in November last year: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php?title=Proposed_features&diff=prev&oldid=173634 But that note was quickly toned down by User:Nickvet419, and now again the page invites misunderstandings regarding the power of a vote. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 05:45:11PM +, Thomas Wood wrote: > 2009/1/31 Pieren : > > 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 50% of the > > contributors) and another map features page for the rest. > I like it, but maybe replace valuable with recommended? If there must be a rating/poll system, also include an “I neither like nor dislike it” option. It doesn’t add to a raw count of likes versus dislikes, although it does indicate that at least those who rate with this option may have at least read the proposal. If this, and making it easy to rate things (Mediawiki poll extension?) gets more people using it, the numbers that come out may start being vaguely useful. As it stands, as someone else said earlier in the thread, 29 out of 89000 or so users is poor and hardly representative. Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Lars Aronsson schrieb: > 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 people/votes? > 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. > > Among the arguments could be: This or that tag is already used in > X number of places in OSM. > This would at least give potential users of the tag the chance to get a fast overview of opinions, instead of just the voting result. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Lars Aronsson 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 people/votes? Like other polls, it gives an indication to the author to see if he's going to the right direction or not with his proposal. And not only hear from the opponents. Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 people/votes? 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. Among the arguments could be: This or that tag is already used in X number of places in OSM. -- Lars Aronsson (l...@aronsson.se) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
2009/1/31 Pieren : > 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 50% of the > contributors) and another map features page for the rest. > > Pieren > I like it, but maybe replace valuable with recommended? -- Regards, Thomas Wood (Edgemaster) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 akin to OSM-style > crowdsourcing than the rather Wikipedia-esque procedures we have at the > moment. > > Then, the people who maintain Map Features can pull out the most popular > tags and descriptions from here; same goes for Potlatch presets, JOSM > presets, and any other lists of tags. It's an interesting idea, and I like when people come up with constructive suggestions. Just one thought: what would prevent an edit war on the data when people interpret the tags differently? I think that there still is a need for some kind of consensus. Erik ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > 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 Board keeps > digging up), a large urban area. I did some mapping in the Gambia in early January (not much of it in OSM yet, and deleting my GPS log was not a good idea). Here smoothness= could make quiet a lot of sense, as the "smoothness" of the road pretty much decided what kind of vehicle you had to hire and what route to follow. Of course, if you did bring a mechanic, that did influense the decision. This is not to say that I support the tag, as my vote indicates, but something similar can be useful. > 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 differentiating between winter and > summer. Or dry/wet season for that matter. - Gustav ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 50% of the contributors) and another map features page for the rest. Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
> 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 mean >> a damn. 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. Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/User:RussNelson r...@cloudmade.com - http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 mean a damn. > I don't think a well thought-out proposal is wasted time, however he might be disappointed when he finds out that his accepted proposal does not mean it will be rendered or even used by other people. There is definately a discrepancy between how people see OSM e.g. on the forum and on the mailing lists. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 people's patches. (Or switch off Potlatch overnight because someone thinks its BS). So I think this comparison is a little bit off. bye Nop ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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: *surface* - values used: paved (145222), unpaved (74006), gravel (20081), cobblestone (17216), ground (9526), grass (6754), asphalt (3084), sand (1725), paving_stones (876) [...see 27 other values] - descriptions: [Fred], [Bill], [HappyMapper], [Sven], [Frogburglar88] - additional info: - related to: [smoothness], [cyclability], [road_quality] - find examples: [map links] - discuss this: [wiki link] - rendered on: Mapnik, Osmarender, Kosmos In other words, you augment the tag description with links to people's explanations of why they're using it. These descriptions (at a standard place - /User:*/Tags_I_Use - and in a reasonably standard format) get scraped to give these links and to find related tags. (Maybe we could even have keywords so you can easily find a tag for the thing you're searching for.) 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 akin to OSM-style crowdsourcing than the rather Wikipedia-esque procedures we have at the moment. Then, the people who maintain Map Features can pull out the most popular tags and descriptions from here; same goes for Potlatch presets, JOSM presets, and any other lists of tags. > What the proposal process sorely lacks is the experience and > attention of some veteran mappers, so it produces less random > results. Why do they not care about it? Because busy people just want to map, not have to spend hours explaining to others why they're doing what they're doing. By the same token, I'm kind of enjoying this discussion but I have the nagging feeling I should really be spending this time coding instead. ;) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wiki%3A-chriscf-vandalism-tp21755334p21765170.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Lester Caine wrote: > The problem that I STILL > see is translating some of the CORE tags between languages, so rather > than having an English base, and translation tables, why not have a > simple numeric entry against a tag for the APPROVED options on a tag? Numeric/text not much difference technically. The subject of translation is tricky, and it costs lots and lots of pain and trouble to get working at all, getting it right isn't that important.. > While not wanting to propose a dictatorship, I do wonder if it isn't > about time that we had a 'standards committee' with members elected :-) No one has time for that. -- /emj ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Richard Fairhurst 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: pages. Or even a tagging@ list. You don't need a system > to have discussion, it happens anyway. > Actually, the current propsal system works very fine, for this. Just saying you "system", concentrate on something that might be important, but it doesn't solve the same issue. So while your idea is fine, you still need the current propsal system. There's a series of post about Github vs. usual development strategy, It's *very* long but basically I think it's an discussion about how to work as a community rather than a chaotic mess. http://journal.dedasys.com/2009/01/10/developer-project-or-project-developer-s -- /emj ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 OSM, where even a newbie is > allowed to contribute. Er, no, and kindly don't put words in my mouth like that. The author of Potlatch against allowing newbies to contribute? Well, I suppose it would save me a lot of work. I'm against people who don't know anything about waterways voting down sensible waterway tagging. I'm against people who've never mapped a footpath or bridleway voting on smoothness. I'm against people like me, who don't even know what a baby hatch is, voting on baby hatches. OSM newbie or otherwise has nothing to do with it. Subject knowledge does. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wiki%3A-chriscf-vandalism-tp21755334p21764657.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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: http://www.nabble.com/Wiki%3A-chriscf-vandalism-tp21755334p21764616.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 happens anyway. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wiki%3A-chriscf-vandalism-tp21755334p21764578.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 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 Board keeps digging up), a large urban area. 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 differentiating between winter and summer. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wiki%3A-chriscf-vandalism-tp21755334p21764564.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 textbook form it does.) > > This is not true in OSM; we have votes, but they are never more than an > "indication". Our votes should perhaps better be called "straw polls". > Anyone can use a tag that has been rejected in such a poll, and > sometimes it gets even built into the renderers, and vice versa. > Indeed, but the whole system suggests otherwise. When reading the wiki and listening to what many other people write about the proposal and voting system, you have to think that the whole thing means something. The terms 'Accepted' and 'Rejected' are one example for that. They sound like they are much more than an indication. Even though no Proposal can really be 'rejected' in OSM (you can still use it if you want), almost everyone who will read 'rejected feature' will probably refrain from using the proposal. I would prefer if there weren't any 'Accepted' or 'Rejected' proposal, but only 'Proposed' that are open for discussion and 'Finished' (or some better term) that have the details worked out so far, so you can be sure that they don't change completely over night. > If we would just ignore the whole process saying that nobody cares > anyway, that would be much more to my liking. > But that should also be documented on the wiki. We can't expect that people abandon or understand the proposal system, when the wiki tells them otherwise. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Sven Rautenberg wrote: > 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 German community should come to this, non-localised mailing list >> and have the cojones to say so. > > Frederik as a member of the german community just did so. > > And if this is not enough for you: I take offense in chriscf's action as > well. No matter how much I like this tag, his action is simply unacceptable. > > And now? ... > >> 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. > > Edit war on the wiki? I think the main problem here is the fact that the MAJORITY of contributors do not have English as a first language, and so the original decision to make English the 'accepted standard' was the suspect one. And since English is my ONLY language I don't think I have any bias in this. The 'consensus' has supposedly been that all tags should be in English, so any tags not providing a clean English definition are - in theory - not acceptable. BUT there is no real control on how that rule is implemented? And since very few people get involved with votes, the core structure does seem to be under strain. I'd like to reinstate a proposal that I made some years ago, but which was shot down as not being acceptable 'XML'. The problem that I STILL see is translating some of the CORE tags between languages, so rather than having an English base, and translation tables, why not have a simple numeric entry against a tag for the APPROVED options on a tag? These would be locked down in some agreed way, and each language can have it's own interpretation of what a numeric tag signifies, but the rendering would be to an agreed format against the numbers - although I can see country specific aspects for local display such as selection of colour coding for roads, etc. RANDOM tag entries would still be allowed as plain text, but until a firm consensus appears they would not move to locked down entries. This still does not get around the problem of 'sub-tags' such as smoothness for road condition, but would allow the potential for more practical implementation of additional data such as 'road condition' and other areas where on the whole the local interpretation of something like that may be totally inappropriate in another country? While not wanting to propose a dictatorship, I do wonder if it isn't about time that we had a 'standards committee' with members elected from the different talk groups to have the final vote on what gets promoted from random text to supported - translated tag? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
I've added two user templates to the wiki that describes how I feel (The
layout isn't great) :
{{user incl}}
{{user no-vote}}
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 is not true in OSM; we have votes, but they are never more than an "indication". Our votes should perhaps better be called "straw polls". Anyone can use a tag that has been rejected in such a poll, and sometimes it gets even built into the renderers, and vice versa. And that's a good thing. If we have clueless people voting, then it would be hell to be bound by their decisions! My personal main quarrel with chriscf is that he seems to take voting seriously enough to disfigure the results in the wiki - he seems to believe that voting actually counts for something and thus he can further his causy by falsifying the results. If we would just ignore the whole process saying that nobody cares anyway, that would be much more to my liking. I'm also opposed to the measures sketched by Peter Miller, like raising the bar for acceptance and so on, because that would only lend the process an importance it does not deserve. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 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" (except the ridiculous examples, e.g. smoothness=so-and-so means it can be used by tanks etc., don't know how many tank drivers we count among our ranks). Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
> > 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 list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
> >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.
>
I don't think that that's true - someone who's new to OSM (i.e. me, a
few months ago) won't know the significance of the Map Features page
until they've read it - they're more likely to type something into the
search box. If you do that for e.g. "gate" you'll get the
"barrier=gate" page and "Sv:Map Features" but not the English "Map
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.
The first paragraph of map features is actually a very good description
of what tags are acceptable and what not ("tag what you like, but it
makes sense to use the same tags as other people"). Maybe it needs a
bit more prominence - a description on the main wiki page as well as the
two small-print links?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 that bases itself on only tag usage without any discussion area on a tag is a backwards step. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 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 We are agreed that the voting system needs improvement. I am especially annoyed about people who never contributed anything to the discussion and then just smugly vote "no" without giving a reason. So a good vote needs a better system and considerably more attention. But just because people have not been paying attention when asked to contribute does not give them the right to overrule those who did. > 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. It's not quite that easy. I agree, that "very_horrible" is ridiculous - if you are a native speaker or proficient in english. If you have only a basic understanding of english and you are doing your best to contribute and express yourself, it is not. And last time I checked, OSM was supposed to be a global endeavour. So I'd rather would have to ask the question: Why did none of the people who see an obviously ridiculous value - including myself - step in and correct it? Should have been very simple, shouldn't it? > I'm starting to wonder about a "Tags I Use" system. In other words, if I > think I have a smart way of tagging tracks (their surface, their > cyclability, conditions through the year, etc.), I document it - maybe > on the wiki (/User:Richard/Tags_I_Use), maybe someplace else. I explain > what I use, why. Other people do the same. > > A miraculous aggregator then goes through all these pages, drawing in > some Tagwatch data, and reports "50 people are using surface=gravel, 10 > people are using smoothness=very_horrible, 1 person is using > my_bike_suspension=knackered" - and links to people's documentation. > > Then, for those who like to have everything in a central place, once the > tags have been used n times, they can go in Map Features. Well, you are proposing a differnt kind of vote by usage of tags. An interesting thought, but probably no the solution. Some of the shortcomings are: - it can be even more easily abused to push silly tags. With some diligence or a little programming I can easily get a tagwatch count of >100 for anything I like. And as this is only in the DB, nobody even sees it coming. I like a proposal page much better. - It lacks a definition of meaning. Just because a tag is used a certain number of times, it does not mean that all people who used it, did mean the same. Just think about the at least 3 usages of "designated". A well formulated proposal is a more concise definition of meaning and has a well-kown place to look for this. I'll probably have a hard time to find your personal "my tags" page, even if I want to join your cause. - It lacks a way to simply introduce a new tag. Not all proposals are ridiculous, many are well thought out, address a topic that has been missing so far and are compatible to the existing world. I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to propose and use them if there is no problem. What the proposal process sorely lacks is the experience and attention of some veteran mappers, so it produces less random results. Why do they not care about it? bye Nop ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 12:47 PM, 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 OSM, where even a newbie is allowed to contribute. Or is that the newbies are just good enough to use the existing tags brilliantly created by founders like "highway=footway" ? Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On 31 Jan 2009, at 11:57, Sven Rautenberg wrote: 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 he has been overruled. Chris: Organize more opposition, and nobody will complain about this tag being rejected because too many people were against it. But do not put your single vote above all others. I have no particular opinion either way as to this tag, however on the subject of voting, is the current rule that 51% is enough to get approval? As time goes on I suggest we could raise the requirement. Possibly one would need at least 20 votes for and also at least 80% in favour. This would increase the need to consult and get a consensus. Of course... it might mean that no one bothers to get tags voted on, but that it also fine, it might result in it not getting rendered as quickly though. Is it also worth getting an indication as to whether the coders of the rendering and routing engines actually intend to implement the proposed feature. I realise the process is meant to be easy even if it is messy, but a straight majority will allows tags to be adopted that are very controversial. Possibly we also allow some tags 'on probation' and then pull them out if they don't get taken up within 6 months. On the subject of probation, here are some details about current usage of smoothness. This image shows who is tagging with this tag in Europe and where they are doing it. http://www.flickr.com/photos/peterito/3241268304/ I total of 180 people have used the 'smoothness' tag in Europe and of those 18 have used it more than 20 times. The tag has been used only 21 times in the Americas and has not been used elsewhere in the world. The following values have been used within Europe (including some typos) value way nodetotal bad 627 0 627 intermediate622 0 622 good559 0 559 excellent 233 0 233 very_bad226 0 226 horrible168 0 168 very_horrible 95 0 95 impassable 26 0 26 very bad17 0 17 excelent9 0 9 exellent8 0 8 Bad 4 0 4 horible 1 0 1 catastrophic1 0 1 empassable 1 0 1 very_good 1 0 1 yery horrible 1 0 1 very horrible 1 0 1 Regards, Peter Regards, Sven ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
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 the difference between all the tags and using the right tags in the right place requires either remembering all the tags, or looking them up each time. I find this hard, and having some central place I can go to see all the different tags is essential. (Although I think that the Map_Features page would benefit from being split up a bit, it is huge!) Anyway, back to the topic. 29 votes on a feature is pretty poor, when the stats on OSM state that there are 88994 users. How do we engage people like me? I would like to but have never voted on anything on OSM. It is no wonder 'hard-core' osmers ignore the results of a vote consisting of 0.03% of the community. Is there (or could there be) a weekly or monthly newsletter informing of changes that week/month and proposing any new tags? This talk mailing list gets far too many emails to expect everyone to monitor, but a monthly mailshot with bare bones of what is happening (current stats, perhaps special thanks to major contributors that month etc) together with proposed tags, closing dates, bullet points arguments for and against each tag, with links to more details etc would help to keep me informed anyway. Finally, people who use the tags are more likely to have a better understanding of how the should be used, and so perhaps should have a greater say in matters. How about multiplying their vote by their contribution in the last year? If someone wants a dictatorship, you better get mapping! My 2 cents. Andy Sven Rautenberg wrote: > 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 said so in the > voting section until now? > > :) > > Regards, > Sven > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 said so in the voting section until now? :) Regards, Sven ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
2009/1/31 Sven Rautenberg : > 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 he has been overruled. > > Chris: Organize more opposition, and nobody will complain about this tag > being rejected because too many people were against it. But do not put > your single vote above all others. > I count 4 people on this thread so far who think the tag is just plain silly. And I met 5 people in the pub a week last wednesday who agree it's completely stupid. None of them have voted. And I doubt any of them will as they probably have better things to do, like say, mapping, than sit around voting on a tag they'll never use because it's so stupid. Maybe if chriscf learns about proxy voting. The only problem with this approach is that we just sacrificed the poor newbies to the people who have nothing better to do, and this chriscf dude who's clearly not going to win any awards for diplomacy. Speaking of better things to do, I'm off out now. Expect putney to have a lot more not-in-map-features highlighting on maplint later today. Dave ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
>
> 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 votes on the feature, come on!
What is it? 1% of the active mappers?
Like in a "practical" democracy, there should be a quota of voters to be
attained before a tag is considered "accepted" (or "rejected")...
If the voting process is ignored by the majority (as it seems it is,
including me), it will die by itself.
- Chris -
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Richard Fairhurst
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 this.
Great idea, though it wont replace voting.
> I document it - maybe on the wiki
[...]
> Then, for those who like to have everything in a central place, once
> the tags have been used n times, they can go in Map Features.
I think mapfeatures is the problem. Not only socially ("this tag must
be in mapfeatures") but technically (wikiload). So remove mapfeatures
as first step.
--
/emj
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 he has been overruled. Chris: Organize more opposition, and nobody will complain about this tag being rejected because too many people were against it. But do not put your single vote above all others. Regards, Sven ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
(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 change is obvious. > > I do not agree with the tag either, but as I sort of believe in > democracy I strongly oppose the overriding of votes by individuals. 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 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 which makes the votes meaningless. How does it help for me to cast my vote on (say) amenity=baby_hatch? I've never encountered one and I doubt I ever will. But there are probably experts on baby hatches within the OSM community who can make an informed decision on how it should be tagged. Why should me and my mates be able to veto that? The voting did once mean that, even if the tags didn't benefit from "subject knowledge", they did benefit from "OSM knowledge". In other words, even though the voted tags might not correlate much to the real world, they were at least reasonably consistent within an OSM framework. 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. > Following your thoughts, as this is my conviction, I should stand > up to it and immediately undo Chris' "illegal" changes, thus > starting an edit war? No need, there's been an edit war for about two months now. ;) > I would rather suggest tackling the real problem with the voting > system or at least re-open discussion and vote of a badly designed > tag. Oh, absolutely, I agree. We should. In the meantime Chris is the only person actually doing something about it while the likes of me just mither about how things should be better. But, given that this is a good opportunity to start thinking about it seriously: I'm starting to wonder about a "Tags I Use" system. In other words, if I think I have a smart way of tagging tracks (their surface, their cyclability, conditions through the year, etc.), I document it - maybe on the wiki (/User:Richard/Tags_I_Use), maybe someplace else. I explain what I use, why. Other people do the same. A miraculous aggregator then goes through all these pages, drawing in some Tagwatch data, and reports "50 people are using surface=gravel, 10 people are using smoothness=very_horrible, 1 person is using my_bike_suspension=knackered" - and links to people's documentation. Then, for those who like to have everything in a central place, once the tags have been used n times, they can go in Map Features. That would be a really, really useful tagging resource - one based on real-world usage and knowledge, not on a very small number of largely uninformed votes. cheers Richard ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 like you are calling for anarchay and decision making by edit war. 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. I do not agree with the tag either, but as I sort of believe in democracy I strongly oppose the overriding of votes by individuals. Following your thoughts, as this is my conviction, I should stand up to it and immediately undo Chris' "illegal" changes, thus starting an edit war? I would rather suggest tackling the real problem with the voting system or at least re-open discussion and vote of a badly designed tag. bye Nop ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 voting system which a > lot of us are silently unhappy with. Good luck to him. and silently used by others. The problem here is that Chriscf just wants to avoid that this tag is used by others and never proposed some alternative solutions. And if you look carefully in his wiki contributions, he did a lot of "undo" in other parts, not only about "smoothness". I'm not pro or con the "smoothness" key but definitely against this attitude which would result in a ban in other wiki projects much earlier that in OSM. I tried last month to re-open the dialogue, and some of them accepted to re-discuss and argue the proposal but nothing came from him excepted "it's ridiculous". Pieren ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 German community should come to this, non-localised mailing list > and have the cojones to say so. Frederik as a member of the german community just did so. And if this is not enough for you: I take offense in chriscf's action as well. No matter how much I like this tag, his action is simply unacceptable. And now? ... > 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. Edit war on the wiki? Regards, Sven ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Richard Fairhurst wrote: > >> Then the German community should come to this, non-localised mailing > >> list and have the cojones to say so. > > In German? > > Why not? I've posted to talk-de in English. And Google Translate is a > wondrous thing. Personally I'd like to ... work out a really smart replacement for osm-talk. (It will be called web-forum...not) Are we going to do something to get to a resolution ? Like voting on abandoning the voting system ? Or appoint someone who can protect pages on the wiki ? Replace anarchy with a benevolent dictator. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Frederik Ramm wrote: > Richard Fairhurst wrote: >> Then the German community should come to this, non-localised mailing >> list and have the cojones to say so. > In German? Why not? I've posted to talk-de in English. And Google Translate is a wondrous thing. (BAN GUILDFORD EVENING MEET THIS WEEK) > I think that one should either fight the voting system altogehter, > or accept it (or ignore it), but not accept those results one likes > and delete those one dislikes. That, for me, is not courage of > convictions, it is just mischief. Well, maybe. It's still more than the rest of us have done. Personally I'd like to sit down and work out a really smart replacement for the voting system, but I know I'll never get round to it. In the meantime Chris's action, even if it is the equivalent of lobbing a brick through the window, is the best we have. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wiki%3A-chriscf-vandalism-tp21755334p21758459.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Hi, Richard Fairhurst 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 to this, non-localised mailing list > and have the cojones to say so. In German? A (surprisingly large) proportion of readers are just about able to *read* the English Wiki pages and would not dream about entering a discussion on talk. Don't be so harsh with them just because they hold up their conviction that Potlatch is a heap of crap ;-) [*] > (And I know you're part of the -de community, Frederik, but I'm also not > under any illusions that you're communicating this message because you love > the voting system.) Everyone knows that I think the voting system is ridiculous. > 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. But he is effectively claiming that this very tag was rejected by the voting system, and that is just plain wrong, however ridiculous the tag or the voting system. It's not a matter of liking or not liking either the voting system or the tag. I think that one should either fight the voting system altogehter, or accept it (or ignore it), but not accept those results one likes and delete those one dislikes. That, for me, is not courage of convictions, it is just mischief. I am against the voting system but I will not go so far to simply delete all proposals just because I think the concept is flawed. Would such an action earn your respect as well? Thinking about it, Steve's proposed Wiki cleanup day takes on a whole new proportion ;-) Bye Frederik [*] Not true by the way, we're seeing even sworn Potlatch enemies say "it doesn't seem *too* bad" nowadays... -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
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 to this, non-localised mailing list and have the cojones to say so. OSM is an international project, you can't just fork it by holding kangaroo courts on -de or -gb or -za or whatever. (And I know you're part of the -de community, Frederik, but I'm also not under any illusions that you're communicating this message because you love the voting system.) 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. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Wiki%3A-chriscf-vandalism-tp21755334p21758107.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
