[OSM-dev] Wishlist API/db: bot-flag WAS new contributor terms ID list

Andy Allan gravitystorm at gmail.com
Fri Aug 27 17:31:12 BST 2010

On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 4:51 PM, andrzej zaborowski <balrogg at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27 August 2010 16:19, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2010/8/27 andrzej zaborowski <balrogg at gmail.com>:
>>>>>  I've ...also used bot=yes on many manual edits,
>>>> IMHO you shouldn't do this.
>>> Why?
>> because thereby you are flagging them as automated edits which they aren't.
> Perhaps fixbot is highly automated but other than that the "bots" that
> run on OSM are hardly ever fully automated, in my experience there's
> always some (or a lot of) manual work to do before upload.  So the
> question is how a bot edit is defined, is it an edit that doesn't
> bring in new data, just amends what is already in OSM?  Or (what I
> actually wanted to propose, but expressed it wrongly) let's use the
> flag as meaning "uninteresting" or "likely not the edit you're looking
> for".  This is the same function that "this is a minor edit" on
> wikipedia has.

Then mark your changes as minor edits. And then everyone can ignore
the mark, since I see people (especially on the OSM wiki) trying to
sneak through changes as "minor" when they are anything but.

Really, the problem is not whether or not changes are done by bots or
not. The issue is that you want to see what's changed in the
particular area - by a human, by a bot, by a human pretending to be a
bot, or whatever. That problem is solved by OWL, not by flagging
changesets in any way.


More information about the dev mailing list