Another thought: maybe it would be helpful to think of the DWG work as some kind of fire brigade rather than police. They do not work to enforce formal laws but are around in case something disruptive to normal mapping activities happens too severe for the individual mappers to deal with. If during this work some unintended damage happens that is generally accepted.
In this light it might also be better to consider the Automated Edit rules as documentation of the de facto consensus on the line between normal uncritical edits and problematic ones that mappers frequently find disruptive to their work and that have therefore - based on past experience - been found to be required to follow a special procedure. And Frederiks recent edit of the page with those rules in my eyes does not change the rules, it just documents a fact that is probably obvious to anyone who has ever reverted a changeset before. It does not move the actual line between normal edits and automated edits in any way. If you think this line should be drawn differently i think this should be openly discussed (based on a specific suggestion of course - not just general dissatisfaction) but this would need to take into account the practical experience of the DWG of course. There is another line by the way between normal edits and vandalism which is essentially defined through the Verifiability principle. And just like with automated edits - if you find a user doing lots of bogus edits with a few correct ones mixed in between you can - no matter if you are a normal mapper or DWG - revert those changes in total (after trying to talk to the user of course). There have been in the past a few cases where the ratio between factual and bogus edits approaches unity and where therefore there has been discussion how to deal with that. But as far as i can see none of the changes mentioned in this thread can be considered borderline cases in that regard. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
