[Osmf-talk] Directed Editing Policy

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Tue Nov 21 08:07:27 UTC 2017


   you write that "the DWG is trying to clamp down on" something. I
don't think that is accurate description. In consequence you write you
find the policy "backwards". Perhaps if you allow yourself some more
time to digest what we're suggesting, you can come to a more balanced
assessment. My dictionary also says that the wording "rife with claims
of ...", that you applied to discussions on the talk list, has a
slightly condescending undertone. Is that true, and if so, was that

> If I decide to
> have a few people over to a local community center to collect and add
> data to OSM, am I required to generate a wiki page every time?

It depends. If you're simply providing food and drink and a venue, and
"have a few people over" as you say, then no; even if that includes
newcomers who in the course of the meeting will learn form other, more
experienced mappers. You are not providing the "direction" that this
policy talks about.

If, on the other hand, you hang posters around town announcing "Ian's
Great Maptoberfest" with the explicit purpose of mapping beer tents in
Munich ("all beer lovers welcome, no experience necessary"), and you
plan to provide instructions for your guests on how exactly to map beer
tents, then you are providing "direction" and you will be expected to
make a Wiki page for the activity. This will perhaps take you 15
minutes, on top of all the hours you have already spent producing and
hanging all the posters, arranging a venue, writing a blogpost and
preparing the training material on beer tents. It will be a little extra
work for you, but not much; and it will allow others in OSM to see what
is going on, and they know that they can talk to you if oddly shaped
beer tents should start popping up around the country.

Is this a distinction that you did not understand after first reading of
the policy (and that therefore should be made clearer), or have you
understood the distinction but are objecting to it?

> How will the DWG enforce this policy?

Currently, most of what the DWG enforces is based on receiving
complaints. It is likely that someone violating this new proposed policy
without anyone complaining would go totally unnoticed. The main goal of
the policy, though, would be to reduce any causes for complaints!

> How will the DWG distinguish between
> directed and undirected mapping activity? 

Like everywhere in life there will be grey areas. As a rule of thumb, a
"directed" activity is where the mapper doesn't expect to take
responsibility for what they do because they are "just following

> Shouldn't these sort of recommendations and restrictions on behavior be reworded into a
> "mapper code of conduct"?

The idea of having a mapper code of conduct (for want of a better term)
has been around for a while; I think it would be a good thing to have
and I would certainly welcome work on that. The proposed policy could
then - like other existing written rules, e.g. on imports and automated
edits - be referenced from there. This, however, is a separate endeavour
the prospect of which should not keep us from implementing a policy on
Directed Editing.


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

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list