[Osmf-talk] Directed Editing Policy

Yves yvecai at gmail.com
Tue Nov 21 21:50:43 UTC 2017

While the content of the policy is more or less OK with me, I think the overall tone could be lighter. 
I don't understand why this couldn't be written down as a guideline or 'good practice' instead of a policy. It could become a policy later. Where is the fun of OSM here? 

Le 21 novembre 2017 01:54:37 GMT+01:00, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> a écrit :
>   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
>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. Are you currently
>involved in some form of editing that would be covered by the policy?
>Does the policy present an unnecessary obstacle for some activities? If
>you have witnessed organised mapping efforts that caused problems -
>would these problems have been avoided if people had adhered to the
>proposed policy?
>Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09"
>osmf-talk mailing list
>osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20171121/90a78bba/attachment.html>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list