[Talk-GB] Administrative boundaries (from Re: traffic island mapping / harmful detail?)

[Edward Bainton]

Colin, where you find boundaries have been pushed about, do you have any
sense of which editors are responsible?

I ask because I know I've been guilty of it in the past. I use iD
exclusively, which is presumably the editor of choice for new mappers.

So on this topic of layering, I wonder if a quick fix would simply be to
have iD default to *not* showing boundaries (ie, its check-box isn't
ticked), so you have to opt in to seeing/editing them. (Possibly the
checkbox could also be accompanied by a polite warning about the ease with
which they're changed, and the difficulty of putting them back where they
were.)

It was only after I was proficient enough not to move boundaries (I hope)
that I was proficient enough to use those selectors.

On Fri, 9 Apr 2021, 09:46 Tom Crocker, <tomcrockermail at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Fri, 9 Apr 2021, 09:19 Colin Smale, <colin.smale at xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
>> I would just like to describe the normal paradigm when dealing with
>> layers, as used by many renowned programs (e.g. Photoshop, QGIS). I am not
>> suggesting that all these points are essential or even desirable for a
>> layer-aware OSM editor; it is intended solely as "food for thought."<snip>
>> Have I missed anything?
>>
>
> Layers can be grouped so their visibility can be altered together (and
> some other features like blending I think, not sure what of relevance to
> OSM). I'd like to see this in JOSM (don't think it's implemented?)
> regardless of data layers.
>
>> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20210409/66cd3d8e/attachment.htm>