>> Pierre And about governance, if this community cannot manage his >> contributors, who >> can? We continually have new mappers, some working more or less >> intensively. We >> should adapt or organization to this Wikipedia like structure and try to >> better >> structure local communities. > I certainly agree with the statement, but would strongly lobby against the 'wikipedia' approach to solving the problem. > New mappers NEED to be directed to proper guidance on how to provide new data, and I have proposed in the past that
> new data is ring fenced until a more established mapper can review it, much like we have in hg and git code management. > At the very least a 'Do you wish to save this to the main database' warning would be appropriate at times until a new account > has established some 'kama' in the data submitted? Importing data from third party sources should be something that does require > 'kama' in understanding what one is doing and oversight by others should be added before some automatic processes are applied to the main database. > Some better involvement of local groups would be useful here I think? Lester we both agree that a Wikipedia approach is not satisfactory. In France, and I think in UK and Germany too, there are strong local chapters. The discussions on Talk-fr list and the tools such as Osmosis and Cadastre imports, the various projects of this community all show how this community is take this job seriously. To develop dynamic local communities, that monitor and correct data, contact contributors, meet more frequently, we have to empower these communities. This would move away from a Wikipedia model. The DWG group acting as a watch dog is not enough to build a better map. Pierre
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
