[Osmf-talk] App damaging OSM data

Andy Townsend ajt1047 at gmail.com
Mon Sep 20 22:00:28 UTC 2021


(just to reply to one piece of this)

On 20/09/2021 20:31, Robert Grübler wrote:
> **
>
>
>       Inform DWG?
>
> Ticket#2021081310000199 of 13 Aug. 2021 “iD editor systematically 
> damages data”. No response after 5 weeks.
>
> *Result: null*
>
>
I did read this ticket when it came in to the DWG (as I'm sure did other 
DWG people - at least 2 have commented on the ticket internally).

With any DWG ticket, there's always a certain amount of prioritisation 
that takes place - do we need to deal with X instead of Y first?  When 
your ticket came in I read through it, and a couple of things failed the 
smell test <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/smell_test> so it got pushed 
down the list somewhat.

One of those was (and I hope you don't mind me quoting here) "For years, 
the iD editor made a trail of devastation through relations. Splitting 
paths that are part of relations destroys the order of relation members 
and thus also an essential piece of information".  The reasons were that 
(a) hyperbole is rarely an indicator of issue importance and (b) 
relationship member order isn't considered important by everyone.  Some 
people do like to sort relations, true, but anyone wanting to do 
anything with OSM data such as using it in a router is going to need to 
do something with the data anyway, such as convert the data into a 
graph, where "relation membership" is just another attribute.  More 
generally, speaking as someone who keeps an eye on the status of a large 
number of area features and route relations in GB and Ireland (see here 
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/diary/397310> and here 
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/diary/395232>) I simply 
don't see breakage by iD users out of proportion to the percentage of 
changesets <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editor_usage_stats> that 
are by iD.  For completeness, my own editor preferences 
<https://hdyc.neis-one.org/?SomeoneElse> are such that I don't really 
sit on one side or the other in the "iD vs JOSM" fight.

In addition, you've already raised your issues with the iD project, and 
there's been a significant amount of discussion on those issues (such as 
here <https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/4876>). The OSMF hasn't 
exactly been silent on iD either - the OSMF blog here 
<https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2021/09/13/join-the-osmf-engineering-working-group/> 
and here 
<https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2021/06/15/apply-to-maintain-and-develop-id/> 
there has talked about how they're trying to go forward with it.

Although the DWG /has/ done what it can to prevent edits by buggy 
editors in the past, I don't think that this is a situation that merits 
our involvement at this time, especially given what the OSMF is already 
trying to do.

Best Regards,

Andy (from the DWG, and occasional repairer 
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/102912562> of GB/IE national 
park and other relations)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20210920/24ece689/attachment.htm>


More information about the osmf-talk mailing list