[Talk-GB] Voting mechanical edit: UK shop names
lester at lsces.co.uk
Sat Nov 1 14:24:42 UTC 2014
On 01/11/14 13:36, Dan S wrote:
> Also, Matthijs sent out an RFC email proposing this whole process - he
> got lots of feedback (which he has taken into consideration), but
> no-one objected to the voting mechanism. It's not your fault if you
> only just noticed this happening, of course, but it's a little rude to
> declare "No it isn't" in the sense of shutting him down when he's
> proceeding in such an open and consultative manner. Lots of people
> have discussed Matthijs' proposed changes in the RFC thread and now
> this thread. To me, it seems a good example of consultation.
Many times in the past we have objected to someone's 'automatic'
updating of material. My first objection here is that so many changes
are being lumped into a single 'edit'. As a very minimum each change
should be handled on it's own merit, but as people have been checking
some of the data, the more important question is if a problem as been
confirmed by actual surveying on the ground then WHY hasn't that person
already updated the tag, and then we have a real person in the change
history who HAS checked rather than hundreds of random changes grouped
under the banner 'These were probably wrong!'.
More important! If details HAVE been surveyed and tag in a way that this
change then reverts a correct local input how does one then identify
those changes and prevent editing now and in the future if someone
decides that there are still 'mistakes' that have not been fixed.
The rule is that on the whole tags are always free format text. We would
not refuse an edit just because it's value 'appears' to be a spelling
mistake, and that principle is enshrined in the current guidelines, so
we need editors to ensure that the data they are imputing *IS* correct!
Personally I would prefer that every one of the identified 'problems'
resulted in a message to the original editor asking them to check rather
than blindly making an executive decision that something has to be wrong :(
Yes we want consistent data, but that is not achieved by blindly making
it consistent ...
Lester Caine - G8HFL
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk
More information about the Talk-GB