On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Richard Weait <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:38 AM, Andrew Harvey <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Looks like this has been done again >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/6132651 >> >> The whole closed way bays that I added have been deleted. I consider >> this is vandalism, > > I think that you would be wrong. > > Vandalism would be spelling your name across that harbour in > highway=motorway, or deleting the UN building outline. > > This is a mapping disagreement, changing it back and forth might turn > it into an "editing war" but it's still just a disagreement between > two or more mappers.
If swanilli reverted my changeset (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/6103886) where I changed the nodes I added into closed ways then I wouldn't mind that as it is a disagreement that we should try to resolve on the mailing list. Whatever the outcome of that discussion I can either revert that revert of his/hers or do nothing to leave his/her revert in place as is. But instead of doing a clean revert he/she did this (http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/6132651), the result is my source tags were deleated and the history of the original nodes I added was no longer tied to the nodes he/she added in and some of the nodes were forgotten completely. He/She has partially fixed the forgotten nodes with http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/6164031 but he/she still didn't provide his/her own source tag in lure of the ones I originally added, or tied the nodes history back to the original nodes that I added. So effectivly in my view swanilli has deleated the bays I originally added as nodes, and then put them back in as new nodes with a different ID, while at the same time removing some of the tags I originally had without providing any alternatives to thouse source tags. >> what should I do? > > Forget about it and leave it alone? > > Or talk directly with the other mapper. Use site mail, say "Hi", be > nice and invite them to join your discussion here. It's easy to miss a > discussion about tagging on one or more mailing lists. While the > discussion here, on tagging@ or the wiki might be comprehensive and > lead to a consensus, it won't necessarily reach every mapper. And > consensus here doesn't create "law". > > But remember that in a tagging disagreement, each party is a contributor to > OSM. _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
