On Monday 27 May 2019, Simon Poole wrote: > The problem with this (and the longer thread on tagging), that it has > had exactly 0 effect. > > As I see it we can choose between > > [...]
I think this is a too limited view of the options the OSM community has. I in particular see: * a wide range of possibilities to offer iD on osm.org but not exactly what is being released without creating and maintaining a complete fork. * a wide range of options for regulatory measures, not only on the 'developer behaviour regulation' front (which i have serious trouble with) but also on the technical level by requiring certain modularization so things like presets or validation rules can be easily replaced or disabled by deployments. On a general note and w.r.t. what Markus wrote: > * Automated Edits code of conduct > (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct) >: You take advantage of mappers unconsciously adding highway=footway > to platforms. This is an automated edit. it seems clear to me that any tool that leads mappers to unconsciously perform automated edits could and should be blocked from write access to the API and accordingly should not be available on osm.org. I don't know if iD in its current configuation does this but this seems so obvious and self evident as a principle that it is not even necessary to codify this into written policy IMO. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
