On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Tom MacWright <t...@macwright.org> wrote:
> In this case and others, we should keep in mind whether P2 or JOSM have > safer or smarter behavior. Would they 'notice' that this new road segment > has meaning? Put another way: iD will never prevent all mistakes, but does > it prevent less than P2 and co? (in this case, I think the answer is "no") > It is clear that the project team's sights are set far higher than replicating P2. iD raises the bar, as should any project that wholesale replaces another. Instead the question should be "what achievable workflows have a shot at helping starting mappers turn into quality repeat mappers"? ---- In regards to mistakes: I think it clear that iD makes delete more prominent and easy to hit than P2, and misses opportunities to have better delete workflows. Particularly on POIs the single lone trash can could be confused with another feature, and it is on top of features one might want to inspect. P2's delete key binding was broader than needed for efficient editing, and iD carried it over equally. Relations are opaque in JOSM and P2: iD has the opportunity to raise the bar and take the mystery out of relations.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
