On Sep 25, 2012, at 01:00 PM, THEVENON Julien <julien_theve...@yahoo.fr> wrote:
>
>The need to keep these conditions open-ended is a weakness that lets
>detractors claim that they are arbitrary, but I'm guessing that this is
>necessary to prevent users gaming the rules with stupid technical
>loopholes... Not quite transparent but practical.
>
>This proposal hits all the goals I have seen stated so far... Or are
>there others that are not satisfied by this proposal ?
>
>On the French list, some contributors are complaining that the
>changeset-level tagging makes the separate account requirement entirely
>obsolete. Technically, I believe they are right... But I hope they'll
>see that this proposal could be a fair meeting ground for an opportunity
>to improve the import process with better metadata and make it more
>flexible where necessary while not messing too much with the current
>international consensus
hi,
The proposal of changeset tags seems also good for me but I consider that the arbitrary criteria of node number is a weakness that fall in the trap of "stupid technical loopholes" mentionnedby Jean Marc.
it will be quite easy to split changesets to stay under the limit and avoid the use of a separated account. geographical area limitation (by example country scale) could also be hacked by splitting. that's why I personnally think that purely automatic script without manual refinement are better criteria to justify the use of a dedicated account unless there are some other reasons I'm not aware of that make the only use of tags unsufficiant
I believe RichardF is talking about over 20k objects total, not per changeset. Going much over about 25k per changeset is a bad practice for other reasons.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
