Even without disabling - what a better tool fixes, JOSM's autofix won't find...
On 17 October 2017 at 09:50, Yuri Astrakhan <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, you kind of can fix one with the other - by introducing a better > tool and disabling some of the autofixes in JOSM (very easy to do). A more > complex approach would clearly require a separate topic(s) and a > substantial dev involvement. > > P.S. No, https://master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/ doesn't have any real > data (it shows maps from live servers, but editing shows just a few > objects). > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:36 AM, Tobias Zwick <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I get your point, especially regarding the appliance of the JOSM >> fix-button as a "by-the-way" fixing. >> >> Though, you can't fix possible issues with of one tool by introducing >> another tool. People will not stop using (that feature of) JOSM. That is >> why I think, if you think you detected a problematic issue there in that >> editor, it should be discussed in a separate topic. >> >> On 17/10/2017 00:57, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: >> > Michael, I can only judge by my own experience adding validation autofix >> > rules - I added a number of Wikipedia tag auto cleanups to JOSM, and >> > they were reviewed by one or two JOSM developers and merged, probably >> > because they were deemed benign. I don't know about the other rules, >> > but I suspect many of them also went this route. Should have they been >> > discussed more widely? I don't know, but that question is complicated, >> > just like "what is a local community?" question. What a few devs may see >> > as benign, others may say needs a discussion, right? >> > >> > Mass editing is a different matter. We consider mass editing when one >> > person goes out to fix something everywhere in the world. But when we >> > provide a tool that automatically fixes something that you are looking >> > at, we don't view it as such. Or at least we don't view it when it >> > happens as part of JOSM, but we do when it happens in my new tool. Of >> > course there is an important difference - JOSM doesn't guide you towards >> > those cases. >> > >> > I think massive "by-the-way" fixing is far worse than the targeted fix >> > of a single issue. >> > >> > When you want to fix a single issue in many places, you become a subject >> > matter expert. You know all about that change, how it interacts with >> > other tags, what to watch out for, how to handle bad values, etc. For >> > example, when fixing wikipedia tags, you would see the types of mistakes >> > people make, wrong prefixes people use, incorrect url encodings, hash >> > tags in urls, incorrect multiple values, ... . When you simply click >> > "fix" because JOSM validator tells you it can fix it automatically, you >> > don't have that knowledge, so it effectively becomes a distributed >> > mechanical edit without the "reject" capability. My tool tries to >> > address this - to build domain experts in a narrow field, and let those >> > experts review changes one by one. I do not discount the value of local >> > knowledge, but it is not a panacea - you must be both to make >> > intelligent choices, and in some cases, the domain knowledge is more >> > important than the knowledge of a specific locale. >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Michael Reichert >> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Yuri, >> > >> > Am 16.10.2017 um 16:02 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan: >> > > Rory, most of those queries were copied from the current JOSM >> validator >> > > autofixes. I don't think they were discussed, but they might >> have been >> > > mass applied without much thought by all sorts of editors. >> > >> > Could you please give examples for (a) the mass appliance of these >> rules >> > and (b) rules which have not been discussed but should have been >> > discussed? >> > > There are two ways to use the tool - you can write your own >> query, run it, >> > > and fix whatever it is you want to fix. That's the power user >> mode - >> > > anything goes, no different from JOSM or Level0. And there is >> another one - >> > > where you go to osm wiki, read the instructions, find the task >> you may want >> > > to work on, and go at it. The community reviews wiki content, >> tags >> > > different pages with different explanation or warning boxes, etc. >> The >> > > discussion could still be on the forum, or here, or in IRC, .... >> > >> > Just for future readers: IRC and Telegram channels are no >> replacement >> > for a mailing list or a forum with a public readable archive where >> you >> > can look up the discussions years later. >> > >> > Best regards >> > >> > Michael >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. >> (Mailinglisten >> > ausgenommen) >> > I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists) >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > talk mailing list >> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> > <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > talk mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > -- -- http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/ [email protected] [email protected] دراجة أكبر
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
