[Tagging] Proposal to change key:man_made to key:human_made

[François Lacombe]

Hi

I second the comments of Topographe below. Continuous improvement is a
major challenge.

Le dim. 18 oct. 2020 à 23:09, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
a écrit :

> And once we have done it, we could do it again and again, for all kinds of
> reasons.
>
Not all kinds of reasons: once the change has been reviewed, voted,
discussed by the community for a significant amount of time.
Providing a technical efficiency or a given tool doesn't mean we should
overuse that tool.


> The problem is not the data at the origin, it is the system around the
> database.
>

If the system isn't suitable enough, let's improve it.
For instance: among other things, versions keep a record of a manual edit
of a particular user and allow change reversal.
Once a big change like man_made => human_made has been reviewed and
acknowledged by the community, do we need a formal version to reverse it?
How many DWG changesets have been reversed in the past?
I think the need to create versions for this particular kind of change is
very low.

All the best

François

Le lun. 19 oct. 2020 à 08:55, Topographe Fou <letopographefou at gmail.com> a
écrit :

> Putting appart this 'man' vs 'human' debate...
>
> This reminds me a thinking I regularly have in minds: OSM shall have a way
> to tell all (registered) data users that "starting from yyyy/mm/dd
> following major change in the database will be applied following vote xxx
> from OSM community. Please see drawbacks, workarounds and recommandations
> for editors in wiki page www" . The idea would not be to trigger this
> mechanism every week but to be able to schedule few data scheme
> improvements in concertation with (and supervized by) a dedicated Working
> Group (DWG ? Or a contiunuous improvement wg ?). I think OSM already did it
> in the past and the wellspreading of its data shall not block us for
> improvements. Keys can be seen as arbitrary strings from a sw point of view
> but I think there is a benefit to have consistent keys, which may imply
> from time to time to review 10 years old tagging schemes. It can even
> simplify life of editors and data consumers.
>
>
> LeTopographeFou
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201019/17619e06/attachment.htm>