[Imports] Making the current guidelines/code of conduct about imports/automated|mechanical edits clearer and merged

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 12/24/2012 03:58 PM, Jeff Meyer wrote:
> Again, it seems there needs to be a clearer definition of "import," as
> not all imports are automated.

I think it depends on the attitude of the person doing it.

If the mapper says "today I'll map South Sometown and I'll use some of 
the Somecounty GIS data in the process" then it's not an import.

If the mapper says "today I'm going to take the Somecounty GIS data for 
South Sometown and load it into OSM" then it is.

It is a fundamental difference in operating - in the first situation you 
have people looking for "under-mapped" places and fix them up using all 
available means; in the second you have people looking at available, 
not-yet-imported data and get them into OSM in some way.

It is however difficult to describe that in the form of a policy because 
it has to do with the intention of the mapper, and two people could be 
doing the exact same thing, one with the intention to import, the other 
with the intention to map ;)

> If individuals are reviewing small chunks
> of data at a time as part of a particular import process, and the import
> is not automated, should there still be a separate account?

I (personally) thinkt that if you're importing less than a thousand 
objects in total (not in one session - in total) AND if your "normal 
mapping" strongly outnumbers the amount of importing you do, then it 
doesn't matter too much. As soon as you plan to add more than a 1000 
objects, roughly, then a separate account is advisable - if only to 
signal to people that this is not something you should be doing "on the 
side".

Bye
Frederik


-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"