Hi,
On 07/25/11 09:27, Steve Bennett wrote:
Two thinks that Wikipedia has that OSM lacks, are good visibility of
recent changes (just click "view history"), and localised forums (talk
page). Although it's possible (if difficult) to get the history of a
given object in OSM, I don't know of any easy way to get a sense of
the recent history of an area. Undoubtedly there are third party
websites, but anything built into openstreetmap.org?
There's OWL which in the medium term is scheduled to replace/augment the
current history view. That should give a good idea of the recent
development in an area.
And yes, it would be great to have something like localised messaging. I
absolutely hate Wikipedia talk pages, to me they are the most useless
form of exchange. But it would be great if it were possible to post
notes onto OSM with a certain geographic extent, e.g. "caution, Bing
imagery for this area is 10 years old and many things have been torn
down since", or "mapping party in this area next weekend", or "import of
data planned for this area, see <...> for discussion" and so on.
This is however orthogonal to the changeset-based messaging that I have
suggested. If I want to say something about a specific changeset, it
should be possible to attach my comment to that changeset instead of
having to make a general localised note for the area in question, saying
"I don't think changeset #12345 was a good idea...".
Personally, I would have trouble marking many changesets "-1" without
doing extensive research. But there are a few where I've queried the
author, and in some cases found explanations that weren't obvious at
first
I think it all depends on what you think a "-1" means.
If I find a changeset fishy, then conduct extensive research and find my
suspicion confirmed, I will revert it (and not attach a mere -1 to it).
Problem is that there are many things that I see and I find fishy where
I don't have the resources or the patience for extensive research.
Currently, in these cases I do exactly nothing, which means that the
information "1 person found this fishy" is lost. That information in
itself does not have a value. But if there was a sufficient number of
other people who were of the same opinion then maybe someone
should/would investigate.
(Actually I sometimes to this on IRC: "Does anyone else find this
strange?"; then if a few others say "yep" I might actually investigate.)
Bye
Frederik
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
