[Imports] [imports] (no subject)

[Richard Fairhurst]

Steve Coast wrote:
> Can you clarify what you've said in some of these emails? 
> It's mainly that I want to draw a line between special 
> privileges and limited editors. For example, I think it 
> makes sense to have very specific editors that are good 
> at one or two things, like adding an address for example. 
> But that's different to users of that editor not being 
> allowed to do certain things in other editors. That 
> would sort of break us in to the elite and 2nd class 
> citizens which is something I'm reluctant to go with. Or 
> are you making some separate point?

No, pretty much that.

To break it down, I guess:

1. On Potlatch specifically: it is, always will be, an all-purpose editor. All-purpose editors don't have to be hard to use. "Don't let the easy-to-use editors change this data, because they're only used by n00bs who mess things up" is something I hear now and then, and what this thread was in danger of suggesting; it's the thing I'm most opposed to.

2. On user privileges: fully agree; everyone should be able to edit everything (the corollary of 1).

3. On specific editors: 100% for them. It's still a source of great regret to me that no-one has coded a convincing "OpenStreetBugs for rails_port" - the step _before_ Potlatch, for people who aren't ready to try a vector graphics editor, but still want to tell us that this road is wrongly named, or is one-way, or has a turn restriction; or that this POI is missing. That's the main strength of GMM over OSM (there's a discussion just starting over on the strategic@ list about this).

Simple mobile editors are the other great untapped opportunity... but you know that. :)

cheers
Richard