On 16-03-22 14:52:55, Andy Townsend, wrote 7.8K characters saying:
On 22/03/2016 13:10, Frank Villaro-Dixon wrote:
Technically, it was already run on the whole planet, and so far no bugs
were found.
That's not true. Many people complained and all your work was reverted.*
The complaining was that the thing was not accepted by the community, not
because some bugs were produced. Actually, there was 2 complainings for bugs
but they revealed false afterwards after not having taken into account the
relation.
Now, I need your comments and/or your approval, critiques, etc.
Tell me what you think ;-)
Here's what I think you should do, when you detect a potential problem:
1) Firstly, before fixing anything, try and understand what the cause was.
Perhaps an inexperienced mapper has edited some existing data that broke
something that they didn't understand? You'll need to look at the mappers
who have contributed to the problem, their relative experience, and what
editors they are using (for example, an iD user may been not have seen the
complicated reationship between multipoloygons, and a JOSM user may have
stopped thinking about real-world data and thought _only_ in terms of
multipolygons - both can cause errors).
True. A lot of errors though were made after automated imports; mainly in the
Canada/USA regions.
If these three all agree, and it was just a tagging error (for example
I've seen people add "natural=foo" instead of "name=foo" recently) then it
makes sense to "just correct the data". However, it's quite likely that
these three might disagree, and perhaps you need to explain to an earlier
mapper how multipolygons work, or to someone who has come along and
"corrected" data in the interim that what they've changed something to is
a valid OSM tag, but doesn't actually match what's on the ground in this
case.
Yep, true to. But the idea here is not to correct the data, but to remove
duplicates. In the script, if the relation and the way have not the same tags,
then it doesn't do anything. ONLY in a case of 'perfect copy' then the
redundant tag is removed.
There may be many scenarios that you haven't considered when designed what
automatic changes you are trying to make. Other mappers will be able to
help you understand those when you discuss your plans with them.
True to. But we should separate the trivial bot with other changes made.
concerning the bot, nobody hasn't still showed me a concrete error…
Also, please don't think that "changing a tag to one that is valid within
OSM" means "making the data correct" - it doesn't.
Again, that's not the goal if it. As said above, the role is NOT to change
tags, but to remove redundancies.
Cheers,
Frank
--
frank.villaro-dixon.eu - PGP: 6F36914A
Envie d'électricité 100% verte ? Enercoop.fr
What is a Velomobile ? www.sans-essence.eu
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
