[Osmf-talk] Directed Editing Policy
penorman at mac.com
Sat Dec 30 21:59:55 UTC 2017
On 11/20/2017 4:54 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> the DWG has prepared a policy on "Directed Editing" (former working
> title "Organised Editing Policy"). Read it here:
> The policy picks up (but doesn't slavishly follow) the results of our
> survey, where it became obvious that transparency and communications are
> what mappers find most important about organised mapping efforts. The
> policy replaces the somewhat fuzzy terms of "paid" and "organised"
> editing with the concept of "directed editing", which is essentially
> when you're required to edit OSM (because of work, a school assignment
> etc) and/or when you're told by others exactly what and how to map.
> The DWG is interested in feedback on this proposal.
Last month I brought paper copies for the proposed directed editing copy
to the local mappy hour for feedback. With holidays, I haven't had time
to type up the notes until now. The notes are mainly in-line on printed
copies of the policy.
For transparency reasons, I'm including this in the general feedback to
avoid any perception of secret inside-only feedback.
- Preserving proper community governance is an additional reason
- "a level playing field for" sounds weird, and phrase will be taken
- Also about quality edits
- Most people won't know RFC 2119 terms
- Only three terms are used, should we bring in definitions?
Introduction after ¶5
- "standard event format clause? (for HOT)" - I'm not sure what this
A. 1. ¶1
- Suggestion of alternative: integration w/ your own system
A. 1. ¶2
- Suggestion of a template
A. 3. ¶5
- Suggestion of "Note: If the event is unexpected like an earthquake,
this may not be possible, that's fine."
A. 4. ¶5 sent. 2
- Too formal phrasing
- People imagine something more involved than current training that they
B. 2. ¶1
- Suggestion of changing "must aim to" to "should do your best to"
- Suggestion of adding "Like every other mapper on OSM" to the beginning
of the sentence.
The above feedback is not necessarily my opinion.
More information about the osmf-talk