[Osmf-talk] reviewing imports (was: "a viper pit...")
frederik at remote.org
Wed Dec 20 12:32:29 UTC 2017
On 20.12.2017 10:30, Ilya Zverev wrote:
> For example, let's take the recent discussion in imports at . A VP of a company subscribes and posts about a Walmart import, 4600 points, with no licensing issues, good tagging and nicely visualized. Next comes Ian and thanks him for the work in preparing the import. Normal? Yes for the american community, I guess.
> But not for OSM: it's unheard of, that an import discussion starts with a grateful words, and not criticism. It is so uncommon in our community, that Frederik immediately replied with sarcasm
You are misrepresenting the situation.
I had a few questions about the import and found a few minor flaws that
I pointed out in an *extremely* polite fashion. Anyone can read my
Example quotes from that email:
"Do you happen to have building outlines too?"
"Would e.g. your opening times information
apply to the pharmacy as well?"
"I'm not sure if these chain-specific denominations are really desirable
to have in the name tag ... I would probably be tempted to map it as
such - i.e. name=Walmart"
"In my particular example, you have set an "addr:full" tag that
contains the street and house number, but you have not set
"addr:housenumber" or "addr:street". What we would normally do is ..."
This is 100% friendly and constructive criticism. I also made it very
clear that I only looked at one single POI in the import, hence I might
have accidentally found the one that has a problem.
The import did not have "good tagging", as you claim above; and it is
totally normal for a first suggestion to not have "good tagging", and
for people on the imports list to suggest improvements.
Suggesting improvements to obvious flaws is all I did with regard to the
original poster, and no ill will or unfair criticism was directed at
him. Claiming that I "tried hard to find as much flaws in the import as
possible" is blatantly untrue. Offering constructive criticism and
suggestions for improvement is what the whole imports discussion process
My sarcasm is directed at those who make a joke of the imports process
by saying "yes great" to something without actually having looked at it
and spotted obvious flaws. If you don't have the time to look at the
quality of an import, that's ok, but then don't write something that
sounds like you did assess the quality and it was good. That's insincere
at best - how would you react to a compliment where someone says "great
code you've written there" and then you find out they've only looked at
the github index page? You are doing nobody a favour with that; least of
all the person who suggests an import. It might look "welcoming" on the
surface, but it is bad for everyone including your own reputation.
I'd also like to second Simon's message, that it would have been
appropriate for you to add a "full disclosure" to your message; to form
their own opinion, I think readers should know about your involvement
with the import in question.
PS: If sarcasm was insta-banned from OSM, we'd probably have had to live
without your contributions for the last 5 years or so. Which would,
seriously, have been quite a loss.
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
More information about the osmf-talk