I'm off to bed but would just like to respond to this one before I do. Tordanik wrote: > On 25.09.2012 19:11, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > > - search-and-replace tag changes > > - automated geometry fixup > > - reverting edits > > In my opinion, none of that (if performed though editing software > on a moderate amount of data) is something that should require > the same amount of discussion and bureaucracy as a country- > wide import.
Hang on, you've got this completely wrong. There is no extra discussion involved in this proposal. No extra bureaucracy. None. This proposal is _purely_ about how edits (that are already happening) are flagged up. The proposal is just to add two extra tags, on the changeset, that permit extra visibility. It's not much. I run a revert bot (http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/General%20Dreedle) and would be very happy to add one line of Perl to add these tags and thereby flag up "this is an automated edit". It doesn't seem onerous to me. And no - this isn't intended to hit restoring a single way via P1 (while it still exists) or whatever. Though I have to admit I'm rather flattered that Jochen has admitted to using Potlatch. ;) cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Proposal-for-import-guidelines-tp5727448p5727548.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
