[Tagging] solving iD conflict (was: pointlessly inflamatory title)

[Christoph Hormann]

On Friday 24 May 2019, Kevin Kenny wrote:
> > In general, our project isn't a top-down strictly managed project
> > with a controlled decision-making process. This means that many
> > things have to be discussed over and over, and the community
> > generally doesn't speak with one voice. But this also gives us some
> > resilience; there's no one "tag central command" that someone could
> > take over and dictate what we are to do.
>
> I think at the root of the complaints in this thread is the idea -
> justified or not - that the maintainers of iD are attempting to
> arrogate that role unto themselves.

Note there is not really much in terms of 'justified or not' - we have a 
clear statement here:

https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6409#issuecomment-495231649

that without any significant amount of reading between the lines 
communicates dividing the OSM community into a relevant and irrelevant 
part by an authoritive decision that does not have to justify itself 
against anyone.

> To the extent that they are, it is probably because the discussion
> forums on tagging - at least, this list - are too cacophonous to
> inform their decisions about what tags to present in iD.  Where
> consensus fails here - as, in my experience, it almost always does
> for any question that isn't answerable by tagging that was well
> established years before I got here - the iD developers are really
> faced with the decision: implement some arbitrary choice that makes
> sense to them, or do nothing about helping iD users to map the
> feature in question.

The fact that decisions are made is not the problem here.  If you are in 
a decision making position in any kind of project within a diverse 
community like OSM you are inevitably making decisions in situations 
where there are varying opinions.  This basic fact is not what people 
have issues with in case of iD presets and validation (at least not 
more in this case than in any other).  

The problem is if as you describe it people "implement some arbitrary 
choice that makes sense to them" and this "makes sense to them" is not 
based on a qualified in depth look at the whole situation and all its 
angles but from a narrow filter bubble where indeed (as linked to 
above) things might appear clear and simple while with consideration of 
the broader reality they are not.

I have come to the conclusion that it is quite definitely not bad 
intentions that lead to this approach but simply being overwhelmed by 
the complexity of the situation.  The iD developers are foremost 
software developers.  They are certainly highly qualified in software 
development and several people here have expressed appreciation for 
their work in this field (and i agree with that).  But that does not 
provide the background and experience in OSM mapping and global 
geography to make qualified decisions on tagging questions.  Trying to 
solve this by "dumbing down" questions and ignoring perspectives on 
them you don't understand is not a solution.

One of the key qualifications for any decision making position is IMO 
the ability to recognize when you lack the background to make a 
qualified decision and the ability and willingness in those fields to 
yield decision making to others who are more qualified.

This is evidently something that is becoming more and more important as 
OSM grows as a project and it becomes increasingly difficult for a 
single person to be knowledgable about every aspect of it.


-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/