[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Sinkholes refinement
André Pirard
A.Pirard.Papou at gmail.com
Wed Nov 15 21:41:00 UTC 2017
On 2017-11-14 19:34, David Marchal wrote:
> Hi, Yuri.
>
> Though I understand your request and find it relevant, I’m unsure
> about altering a proposal page after the vote had started; AFAIK, I’m
> supposed to let it as is, apart from the vote section. Could you show
> me if my assumption is wrong, or can someone on the ML confirm or
> infirm that?
>
> Awaiting your answers,
Here is one.
I'm rather surprised by this remark.
I agree that a proposal which is what other persons "signed" must not be
changed.
But there are so many undiscussed changes to the wiki*_s_* (even
unnotified ones, do you remember that noexit=yes story battle? I'm
keeping the most stupid of it yet to be told) that I would praise, not
blame, Yuri for his general way of doing.
I would suggest to leave the proposal alone, except for mentioning the
following, to create a final wiki page and to ask the consent of this
list for minor modifications, especially correcting typos.
And here is one correction, with wider justification...
If I had voted (I didn't have the occasion, sorry), I would have put as
a yes voting condition to change
"Give a way to distinguish the different types of sinkholes" with "...
of natural=sinkhole
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dsinkhole><https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dsinkhole>
(read that article)".
The reason is
* that foreigners non-English speakers (everyone is a foreigner to
most of the world) are liable to ignore what is a sinkhole is, and
that it would be a shame to spoil its unusually great description in
natural=sinkhole
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dsinkhole> to tell
them
* that one could believe that sinkhole=*
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/sinkhole> can
go without natural=sinkhole
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dsinkhole>.
OK, it's explained below but...
* that I suppose that many a one quickly read as far as they think
they have understood and that any means to make them feel that there
is more to it is welcome
* that too many wiki articles use insufficient definitions (e.g.
source=survey has improved but would need a link to the explanation
inside) and
* the net result of that is many mapping mistakes (such as the totally
useless bicycle=yes)
* the most regrettable result is GPS mistakes because routing logic
obeys exactly what it's told
Cheers
André.
> Regards.
>
>> Le 12 nov. 2017 à 21:17, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrakhan at gmail.com
>> <mailto:yuriastrakhan at gmail.com>> a écrit :
>>
>> David, hi, just an thought - could you combine the rationale and
>> examples sections? The way you have it now is first you describe
>> each concept, and afterwards you have the same concept but with a
>> picture. I think it would be better to list each variant with the
>> picture right away.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 8:30 AM David Marchal <penegal at live.fr
>> <mailto:penegal at live.fr>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello, there.
>>
>> Almost 3 weeks passed and only 3 people told that they preferred
>> karst=yes instead of karstic=yes. As the first one was also the
>> one stated as the proposal, and the second one was only mentioned
>> in erroneous examples, I assume this relative unanimity is enough
>> to confirm karst=yes as the one to use, and will create the wiki
>> page accordingly. Thanks to all who voted; the proposal process
>> is now fully finished, apart from creating all the Wiki pages.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>>
>>> Le 24 oct. 2017 à 19:16, David Marchal <penegal at live.fr
>>> <mailto:penegal at live.fr>> a écrit :
>>>
>>> Hello, there.
>>>
>>> The vote period passed, and the proposal received a total of 16
>>> approvals, 1 spoilt vote and 0 refusals, so I closed the vote
>>> and marked the proposal as approved. Thanks to all the voters;
>>> I’ll create the according Wiki pages and edit existing ones to
>>> reflect the vote on the following days.
>>>
>>> As a side note, there is a secondary vote on the proposal page;
>>> indeed, some voters noticed an inconsistency in the proposal,
>>> ie. a proposal example carried karstic=yes tagging instead of
>>> the proposed karst=yes. To make sure of what version the voters
>>> approved, I have to ask them to go back on the proposal page and
>>> vote, in the dedicated subsection, amongst karstic=yes or
>>> karst=yes. Once the choice will have been asserted, I’ll be able
>>> to create the corresponding Wiki page.
>>>
>>> Thanking you for your patience, and awaiting your votes,
>>>
>>> Regards.
>>>
>>>> Le 8 oct. 2017 à 09:51, David Marchal <penegal at live.fr
>>>> <mailto:penegal at live.fr>> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> Hello, there.
>>>>
>>>> The normal voting duration passed, but there are not enough
>>>> votes yet to approve or reject the proposal, so I extend the
>>>> voting period by two weeks to allow latecomers to vote.
>>>>
>>>> Awaiting your votes,
>>>>
>>>> Reagrds.
>>>>
>>>>> Le 26 sept. 2017 à 20:26, David Marchal <penegal at live.fr
>>>>> <mailto:penegal at live.fr>> a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello, there.
>>>>>
>>>>> As this proposal has been RFCed more than 2 weeks ago, and
>>>>> that comments have been addressed, I’m now putting it on vote.
>>>>> Please go on the proposal page
>>>>> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Sinkholes_refinement)
>>>>> to vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> Awaiting your votes,
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Tagging mailing list
>>>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Tagging mailing list
>>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20171115/5312c2ae/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Tagging
mailing list