Based on everyone's comments, I've tried editing the page again. Now there are two main sections: a short section that defines "What is Verifiability?, then all of the Examples. The main change is that I added 2 bullet points to the "What is?" section, pulled from the 2 older examples about buildings and waterways, and I removed one of my new examples (ridges):
"Verifiability is an important concept to OpenStreetMap. OSM data should, as far as is reasonably possible, be verifiable. This is a good practice guideline covering all mapping activity and a policy governing choices we make about which tags are used and gain acceptance." [Contents] What is Verifiability? At the core, "verifiability" is that everything you do can be demonstrated to be true or false by other mappers - the latter hopefully implying that there has been a change on the ground that needs mapping. - We apply this not only to the mapping data itself, but also to the way in which we record it - the geometries, tags and values we use to describe objects on the map. - A tag/value combination and geometry is verifiable if and only if independent users observing the same feature would make the same observation every time. - Objective criteria, clearly documented on the wiki, help to make tagging verifiable by individual mappers. Examples <new heading> Objective Criteria: e.g. Building Height <subheading> It is desirable to have objective criteria for a user's tagging to be verifiable. This principle applies to any observable characteristic, be it numerical or descriptive. For example, buildings come in various sizes. ... <etc> Improving verifiability by documenting values: e.g. Waterways <subheading> Clearly documenting tags on the wiki always helps with verifiability. ... <example about waterways> ................................. The one thing that could make the page shorter would be to cut out the "Problematic Tags" section at the end, which discusses Highways classification and then calls out "smoothness", "sac_scale", and "trail_visibility" as problematic. I'm not sure if these examples are still so relevant now as they were in 2008. But I don't see how all of the examples could be removed or moved to a different page. The original page from 2008 was 50% example, because defining verifiability is hard without practical examples. On 5/1/19, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > One problem is the 'audience' is so varied. > > We have the beginner.. who wants basic stuff fast. No time to read details, > get on and map! > > The 'expert' with an edge case or problem and wants minute detail. > > How to deal with them in the one document? > > Have sections.. > > At the front there needs to be the basics.. for the beginners... avoid TL:DR > > Then as a completely separate section .. details.. verbose. Possibly these > should be separate pages, or use the discussion page? > > > > On 28/04/19 22:43, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: >> I could remove some of my examples and some of the other that have >> been added since 2015, but I wonder if the page will still be >> understood by most people without examples? >> >> Perhaps we could move all the examples to a later section, so that the >> first part is relatively short and to the point? >> >> On 4/28/19, Andy Townsend <ajt1...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 28/04/2019 10:43, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: >>>> Please suggest any improvements to the wording or corrections: >>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability#Geometry >>>> >>> Thanks for trying to improve the documentation, but unfortunately, >>> trying to add more detail (including specifics about particular tags) >>> makes the page more complicated and more difficult to understand for new >>> mappers (who are usually the people I'd point at that page with a DWG >>> hat on). >>> >>> For example, compare the current version of the page with this one from >>> 2015: >>> >>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Verifiability&oldid=1141651 >>> >>> The 2015 version contains a definition, an example and short "what to >>> do" and "what not to do" sections. >>> >>> The current one simply doesn't do that. Obviously there are 20 edits >>> since that example that I picked out pretty much at random from 2015, of >>> which yours is only the last, and the authors of each of those have seen >>> an edge case that wasn't quite covered by the documentation, which led >>> to them adding their new section. The problem is that while all of those >>> extra little bits on their own have value, taken together they do make >>> the page less useful as a summary of a key concept in OpenStreetMap. >>> >>> Maybe what would be better would be to try and reduce the >>> "Verifiability" page to its original summary status but to break out >>> some of the detail into linked sub-pages? The whole "geometry" section >>> would be a good candidate for that (the page already contains an >>> example, two paragraphs above). Also "story-telling" content such as >>> "Someone might do this" is probably better elsewhere too. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Tagging mailing list >>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
