So who decides what is good data and what is bad data?
And "visibility on the ground" needs nuancing. Are we to remove underground pipelines/power lines? Or boundaries? "Visible and/or verifiable" might be better. A rule that needs loads of exceptions, is not a well formed rule. An abandoned railway route IS an abandoned railway route, even today (i.e. that is current data). It WAS a working railway line. That is all verifiable. On 2015-08-15 12:31, Serge Wroclawski wrote: > On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 5:19 AM, Volker Schmidt <vosc...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I would like to argue for a general >> do-not-remove-if-you-do-not-have-the-original-mapper's-ok-beforehand policy >> for these and similar cases. > > Then you are (whether or not you intend it) arguing in favor of > dis-empowering users. > > Our project's policy thusfar has been in contrast to other projects in that > each and every one of us is empowered to make changes to anything we see. > > We certainly have policies in regards to quality control- if someone makes a > bad edit, we revert it, but we are always in favor of the empowerment of our > users to fix problems, rather than saying that they can't, or need to ask > permission beforehand. > > Let's be very clear on the issue in this case- it's regarding a very subtle > line of objects which are in one of two states: > > 1. Visible on the ground but difficult to detect (ie require specialized > knowledge) > > or > > 2. No longer visible at all. > > The problem that we have in some parts of the world is a lack of data, but in > other parts, we have an abundance of bad imports, and a general timidness > around the removal of data that we can't find the owner of, which leaves us > with data that *we know is bad*, but where the individual mappers do not feel > empowered to act on because of this exact attitude of needing to contact and > work with the importer. > > This leaves our project with a problem of lots of data and no one feeling > empowered to remove it. > > If we continue to go down that road, we will be left in an untenable > situation of living in the data equivalent of a hoarder's house. > > I'm very much in favor of mapper to mapper collaboration. In fact I am the > person who mentored the GSoC project to add changeset discussions, but I do > not believe we want to change the project's culture into one where no one > feels empowered to edit the map without first asking permission. > > - Serge > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
