[Talk-ca] CanVec Reverts

[James]

>From what Rps333 told me in person he had worked many hours on that
changeset and was frustrated when someone reverted before fixes could be
applied. Could you revert the revert?

On Sep 1, 2016 4:09 PM, "Paul Norman" <penorman at mac.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Multiple people have referred this issue and changeset 39517002 to the
> OpenStreetMap Foundation Data Working Group about this issue. The Data
> Working Group has responsibility for the resolution of disputes beyond
> the normal means of the community, as well as some responsibilities
> concerning imports. I am replying here rather than the changeset as it
> should reach everyone involved.
>
> CanVec Quality
> ==============
>
> The CanVec import is one that was started long ago so parts of the
> documentation are lacking and some aspects are unclear.[1] CanVec, like
> any other import, has certain hard requirements, including the use of a
> dedicated user account.
>
> In particular it is expected that imported CanVec data is
>
> - Integrated with existing data, particularly at NTS/CanVec tile edges
>
> - Valid
>
> - Internally consistent with both the newly imported CanVec and existing
>   OSM data, particularly to avoid overlapping landuse like forest and
>   water, forest and residential, or wetlands in what is obviously a
>   residential subdivision.
>
> - Uploaded in small enough parts that the changesets make sense. This
>   means never uploading more than 50k objects at once, and typically
>   fewer than 10k.
>
> - Not duplicating existing OSM data. Evaluating what data is better
>   generally requires experience with both CanVec and OSM data in the
>   *region being mapped*
>
> It is not required that CanVec data is compared an external source like
> Bing imagery, but this is helpful, particularly when resolving problems.
>
> We encourage the Canadian community to develop better documentation for
> people importing CanVec to achieve this and to remove outdated
> documentation.[2]
>
> Reverting
> =========
>
> Advance permission is not required for reverts, nor for normal mapping
> activities. At the same time, users are expected to be responsible,
> particularly when using tools for reverting which allow large-scale
> changes where other users may disagree with them.
>
> Where there are problems with an import reverting is an option, but
> just one of many, and often not the appropriate first action. Unless
> there are legal problems[3] or fatal problems with the import it is
> preferable if the original importer can fix the problems in a timely
> manner. There was every indication this was going to happen in this case.
>
> The revert of 39517002 was inappropriate and counter-productive. New
> actions like this revert may lead to further Data Working Group
> involvement and potentially blocks. If the Canadian community needs help
> reverting 41749133 and 41756737, the Data Working Group can revert those
> changesets.
>
> While not going into depth on the changeset discussion at this time, I
> want to remind everyone involved that OpenStreetMap is a crowd-sourcing
> project, which inherently involves working with other people. This
> requires good communication, which was absent here.
>
> Paul Norman
>
> For the OpenStreetMap Foundation Data Working Group
>
> [1]: Except for the CanVec license, which is ODbL and possibly CC BY-SA
>
> [2]: Much of the CanVec documentation is outdated, which makes it
>      difficult to know what is relevant. A good start would be removing
>      outdated documentation.
>
> [3]: Please refer cases of large-scale infringement to
> data at osmfoundation.org
>      so we can "redact" the content to remove it from publicly viewable
>      history.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20160901/f98bc071/attachment-0001.html>