[Osmf-talk] Directed Editing Policy
rob.j.nickerson at gmail.com
Wed Nov 22 00:07:09 UTC 2017
This is my gut instinct too.
Random story: I have been trying to persuade a friend to start contributing
to OSM. Unfortunately he had a bad experience with Wikipedia - his edits
were reverted by a user that waved a policy in his face - and he fears the
same if he joins OSM.
I'd like us to provide more support to all people who edit OSM rather than
create a load of policies that are (to new people) effectively hidden on
the wiki but we can wave at them when something is not quite right.
Having said that, there is good stuff here so "scrap it and start again" is
not needed. Instead we should keep sharing comments and ideas and seek the
advise of some of the groups already mentioned (HOT, advisory board, local
Worth also keeping in mind that it is always easier to add more to a policy
in the future than the opposite (removing bits from a policy). "Evolution,
rather than Revolution", if you like to play it safe when introducing
On 21 Nov 2017 9:53 p.m., "Yves" <yvecai at gmail.com> wrote:
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 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. 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?
osmf-talk mailing list
osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the osmf-talk