On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 6:02 PM, Michael Reichert <osm...@michreichert.de> wrote:
> Hi Yuri, > > Am 13.11.2017 um 22:58 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan: > > Andy, I can only assume you agree with the rest of my argument. As for > this > > case -- this is not a mechanical edit. Per definition. I looked at each > of > > these three features, analyzed them, and thought this is a reasonable > > change. You could call it a mistake (I am human), but it cannot be called > > mechanical. > > Here comes another of our unwritten rules into play. Even if a > systematical edit [1] is not a mechanical edit, it is sensible to > discuss it beforehand as if it were a mechanical edit (although you > could steps which involve the OSM wiki). This rule is unwritten but > people who have followed discussions on any relevant mailing list or > forum section will know it because some other users mentioned it there. > That's why silently reading discussions for a while before doing > possibly disruptive things in OSM is recommended (another unwritten rule). > > Michael, was there a URL [1] missing? I 100% agree with you about this unwritten rule, and that's why I am here too, discussing the tool and the quick fix tasks. I might disagree with some of the hardliners, but thanks to the discussion and feedback, Sophox tool has been substantially changed. Also an existing rule in JOSM has been fixed. The quick fixes have all been published, and I hope we can agree which ones are non-conflicting. I do get a lot of animosity instead of fruitful discussion, but despite that there has been a number of good comments that helped it improve.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
