On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Ed Avis <[email protected]> wrote: > Andy Allan <gravitystorm <at> gmail.com> writes: > >>Don't worry, it hasn't actually changed the meaning of anything - it's >>just that the wiki is now wrong. > > Maybe we need some place to document the meaning of tags other than the > (clearly unreliable) wiki? > > Either that or accept that the meaning is not reliably documented anywhere, > which doesn't seem very satisfactory.
I've considered such things (as have many other people over the years) but it keeps coming back to the issue that the wiki is where vast numbers of people are going to go, and so it's more important that the wiki is correct than to have any secondary "better" system. The problem is that the people who have axes to grind, and those who are genuinely trying to help in a misguided way, are drawn towards the most important pages. I've taken the approach over the years that if the non-contentious stuff can be held to an accurate, well-written standard then the rest will slowly follow. I also believe that there's not enough "meta" pages on the wiki, such as guidelines extolling the virtues of being factual. It's also about having faith in the community that we can deal with different people and end up working together. Cheers, Andy _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
