[josm-dev] Checking tags

Jochen Topf jochen at remote.org
Tue Mar 24 08:50:19 UTC 2015


On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:52:04AM +0100, Dirk Stöcker wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, Jochen Topf wrote:
> 
> >If we have a stricter list whats "green" we have two problems: a) Users might
> >just ignore it and b) JOSM will even more than it does now, decide whats good
> >and whats bad. And we (as developers) have to be very careful with that
> >responsibility and probably bring this discussion into the wider community.
> 
> OTOH what I don't want is to mark something as good, which actually is not.
> We had another request regarding brands and names with a list compiled from
> database. But here as well quality of that list did not justify marking it
> special.
> 
> To keep users from "making all green" I said "light color".
> 
> "light green" means "we know that tag and it's accepted".
> "grey" like now means any other tags
> "light red" means we assume tag is bad.
> 
> If you fear the green causes users to go berserk, than we can only add the
> red variant showing bad keys. But actually I trust our users :-)

You are right, we don't want to mark keys green that are not in a list thats
specially vetted to be alright. So how about displaying my "good" list as
"grey", the "unknown" as "yellow", the bad characters as "red" und have a
manually compiled list for "green"? (We can always use a taginfo-generated
list to create candidates for the "green" list, but keep humans in the loop
to check them first.)

This way we have:
"light green" means "we know that tag and it's accepted".
"grey" like now means any other tags but is actually a positive list of
    tags that are very common and/or docmented on the wiki etc.
"light yellow" looks suspicious, take extra care and re-check, is actually
    the list of all other tags we don't know anything about
"light red" means we know the tag is bad.

Jochen
-- 
Jochen Topf  jochen at remote.org  http://www.jochentopf.com/  +49-173-7019282



More information about the josm-dev mailing list