[Tagging] remove “rendering” from proposal template

stevea steveaOSM at softworkers.com
Sun Apr 25 07:44:55 UTC 2021

On Apr 25, 2021, at 12:12 AM, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> Apr 24, 2021, 22:07 by steveaOSM at softworkers.com:
> Hence, it must be explicitly stated this section should not affect voting (Approve or Oppose).

> It definitely can. At least I once voted oppose because someone made obligatory
> for renderers to implement proposal, what was highly misleading and not at all how proposals work.
> I think that was a valid oppose vote, and would do the same in a similar situation

Right, Mateusz:  I believe what we're discussing presently is whether (or not) the "Rendering" section of a proposal should even exist at all, and if it does, be:

1)  Named "Rendering Suggestions"
2)  Explicit in stating to proposal authors "this is an "Optional" section which isn't actually being voted on, it is addressed to renderer authors as "advisory only" or "suggestions only."  Others are welcome to add constructive dialog as they understand that these issues are not a part of the formal proposal and are only suggestions to renderer authors.
3)  Ineffective towards those who might change a vote from Approve to Oppose (or vice versa), as these are merely suggestions.

As what you're describing is something that happened in the past (it seems widely agreed that such "hijacking" of a proposal has happened before and that it is confusing and "muddies the water" of the proposal itself), we're deciding if we clearly identify the "Rendering Suggestions" section of a proposal as "optional" and "only advisory suggestions to renderer authors, but others may constructively participate" so that we can avoid such problems.  Others (less vocally) indicate "no, this section totally doesn't even belong in proposals."

If the first, we're hammering out closer-to-final wording, and Brian and I had an off-list chat about "telling the author that a section doesn't impact the vote does nothing to tell the reader that it shouldn't impact their vote."  In the second, total redaction (removal) of the section from the proposal template in its entirety remains a possibility, but which I'd characterize as "speak up if you feel this section should be completely deleted, we aren't hearing loud calls for that."

There are a number of levels of "meta" going on that make this topic and thread quite difficult.

More information about the Tagging mailing list