[OSM-talk] xybot

[Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists)]

Frank,

Please make sure your work adheres to the automated edits code of conduct
[1] and also I suggest adding links from your script info from that page
somewhere so that users can see what the bot does and why. Automated edits
annoy users who spend hours and hours mapping their area of interest.
Genuine mistakes and always going to happen and pointing those mistakes out
to the user is a good thing. It's not a good thing in my view to change
tagging when you have no knowledge of the circumstances of the tags.

Cheers

Andy

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits  

>-----Original Message-----
>From: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-
>bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Frank Sautter
>Sent: 10 April 2009 11:30 AM
>To: OSM Talk
>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] xybot
>
>hallo someoneelse,
>
>i'm the one behind xybot.
>
>Someoneelse schrieb:
>> I see that xybot has woken up again.  Would an announcement on this list
>> really have been too much to ask?
>xybot is running constantly every week. it has not been woken up again.
>
>> I'm guessing that the rules that it's following are these:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/User_FixTypo3Euro:Xybot
>yes
>
>> If so there are a number of potential problems, especially where the
>> change is not a "straightforward typo".
>> One example is way 32539831 which was changed from "landuse=wood" to
>> "landuse=forest".  How does it know that landuse=forest is correct as
>> opposed to natural=wood?  Both are on map features.
>you are right, i will take out those rules where xybot is just guessing
>the optimal values and ask the maintainers of
>http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/ or
>http://keepright.ipax.at/report_map.php to add them to their validation
>tools so a human brain can set them to the correct value.
>
>> Another problem is where there is:
>> tag_a=value_a
>> tag_b=value_b
>> If it thinks that tag_a is a misspelling for tag_b it'll change the
>> tagging to the following:
>> tag_b=value_a
>> which is just plain wrong.
>no, such changes are prohibited in the algorithm.
>
>> If it is necessary to "validate" the data against a pre-conceived idea
>> of what it should contain (and I'm not convinced that it is) wouldn't it
>> be better to collect lists of "errors" by last modifying user and
>> suggest via mail that they review them?
>i think this would result in a massive spamming of the osm users and i
>don't think that the messaging infrastructure of osm is able to handle
>that.
>
>frank
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>talk at openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk