19 Sep 2019, 16:52 by tagging@openstreetmap.org: > Personally I have a problem with the asymmetry of work that this > requires from mappers who need to protect their work from iD versus > mappers who blindly "upgrade" using iD. > https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6517 <https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6517> - "Despite that iD is asking user to add brand:wikidata and brand:wikipedia and describes this action as "XYZ looks like a brand with nonstandard tags" and offers user to "Upgrade the tags"." For now nobody made a PR and is with "considering" label. > The simple truth is that automatically adding these brand tags is a > mechanical bot edit, and the fact that the bot in question is triggered > by a user clicking an ambiguous "upgrade" button doesn't change that. > I am tempted to interpret this way, but so far I made no attempt to escalate it to DWG (and I am not planning it, I have found recently two undiscussed imports that should be reverted due to unclear copyright status that are anyway not handled due to lack of time). > These edits should be subject to peer review here on the tagging list, > and the iD branding bot should behave according to the automated edits > code of conduct. Yes, this is slower, but it's the right way. Putting > the onus on the original correct mapper to prevent iD's incorrect tags > seems backward. > I would rather say that iD validator should have sane interface not black box "upgrade tags".
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging