[OSM-talk] redundant proposal? - man_made=fenced_compounds

Chris Hill chillly809 at yahoo.co.uk
Fri Jan 4 15:09:37 GMT 2008


Is there a reason why the waterway=riverbank has not gone through voting?  With the multipolygon relation for islands it seems to work well. 
cheers, 
Chris

----- Original Message ----
> From: Michael Collinson <mike at ayeltd.biz>
> To: talk at openstreetmap.org
> Sent: Friday, 4 January, 2008 8:25:19 AM
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] redundant proposal? - man_made=fenced_compounds
> 
> At 01:22 AM 1/4/2008, Robin Paulson wrote:
> >in my quest to tidy the proposals page on the wiki, some proposals
> >have come up which appear to be redundant
> >
> >is there an acknowledged way of removing them, without going through
> >the whole comments/opinions/voting process?
> >
> >http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Fenced_compounds
> >
> >is a good example
> >
> >thanks
> 
> Ye, it would certainly be good to be more aggressive in cleaning up 
> up the Proposals page, it is hard to casually browse for
> "live"
> 
 proposals.
> 
> Currently, the only mechanism is to move proposals into the "Needs 
> cleanup/modification" and "Works in Progress/Pending" sections at the 
> bottom - which are roughly equivalent to the place sick proposals go
> to
> 
 die.
> 
> I propose:
> 
> 1) Mark redundant proposals with "This proposal appears to be 
> redundant or duplicated.  Unless there are any objections it will be 
> removed on or after dd-mm-yyyy" and leave it there until you or 
> someone else is next doing a clean-up round.
> 
> 2) More generally, any proposal that has been there for more than a 
> year (see the pages "history" tab) be removed.  Looking at a few 
> other proposals, this may be a little too aggressive as the 
> "riverbank" 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Large_rivers 
> proposal would go (or perhaps is should?).   An alternative would be 
> to remove any proposal that has been there a year and had no 
> substantive activity for 6 months.
> 
> Here the dates for your example:
> 
> Created - 29 August 2006
> Last substantive comment - Dec 2006
> Last comment of any kind - Apr 2007
> 
> Mike
> Stockholm 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
> 




      __________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail - a smarter inbox http://uk.mail.yahoo.com






More information about the talk mailing list