On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:06 AM, Jason Remillard <remillard.ja...@gmail.com>wrote:
> It seems like Wikipedia has revert first policy on questionable edits. > It makes it unpleasant to start with the project, since probably every > bodies first edits are questionable. > > OSM policy/culture of discussing a change *before* reverting is really > good thing. > Two good things about Wikipedia that I hope OSM would emulate are (1) how easy it is to see what an edit has changed in an article, and (2) how easy it is to revert an edit—especially good for obvious vandalism. In OSM, trying to figure out what exactly happened in all but the most simple changesets is quite hard. Changesets pages only show what objects were added/modified/deleted but we have no good "diff" tool unlike in Wikipedia. (Granted, diff-ing text is a well-known problem with lots of solutions; diff-ing geodata is relatively new.) The OSM History Viewer is, I think, the best tool we have for analyzing changesets, but it still lacks important features (for example, it can show you objects that have been deleted on a map but it doesn't tell you what those objects are and what tags they had). While we have tools for reverting changesets, they are not as easy to use as with Wikipedia and complex changes sometimes need to be referred to the DWG. In addition, it's hard to partially revert a changeset—reverting only the problematic objects and leaving the rest untouched (or improved).
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
