[Osmf-talk] DWG survey on organized editing

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Tue Oct 3 00:05:28 UTC 2017


On 02.10.2017 20:34, Andrew Johnson wrote:
> Question 1:
>     1) What types of mapping activities should be covered by a policy?
>     Choose one of the following answers
>       o A policy should only apply to paid editing.
>       o A policy should apply to paid editing as well as other organised
>         editing.
>       o I don't think we need a policy at all.
>       o No answer
> Why is this question leading?

I can explain why this question is leading - it's because DWG has been
tasked by the OSMF board to work on a corporate editing policy, and not
to find out if people want one. You could of course say we shouldn't
have added the "I don't think we need a policy at all" point then. The
OSMF board is convinced that some form of organised editing policy would
be beneficial.

The reason for this is that there have been a number of occurrences in
the recent past of "under-the-radar" corporate editing of OSM, some of
them detrimental. Occasionally these things arise from actively hostile
behaviour on the part of the people doing the edits, but the
overwhelming amount of corporate editing is well-intended. The board
does not wish to stop corporate editing, but to give clear guidelines to
ensure that corporate editing is done in a community-compatible way.


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

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list