[OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
mikh43 at googlemail.com
Sun Feb 1 11:32:16 GMT 2009
"Proposed" and then either "Default Recommendation" or "Alternative Tagging"
- with the last of these tags having a link to a, perhaps pre-existing,
default - ? Problem is that my proposal - or any other - will always be
dependent on the mother tongue of the reader. We probably should pay more
attention when discussing a tag to the question of possible ambiguities or
misinterpretation that could arise in translation - and then think about
alternative wording. Some discussions have done this - and we clearly
benefit from a number of veterans whose English is outstanding even if not
their mother tongue.
From: Sebastian Hohmann [mailto:mail at s-hohmann.de]
Sent: 31 January 2009 14:50
To: Frederik Ramm
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Wiki: chriscf vandalism
Frederik Ramm schrieb:
> Nop wrote:
>> I would consider it the basic principle of democracy/a community that
>> things established by vote need to be changed by vote, even if the
>> need for change is obvious.
> Democracy usually means that the vote results decide something. (At
> least in its textbook form it does.)
> This is not true in OSM; we have votes, but they are never more than
> an "indication". Our votes should perhaps better be called "straw polls".
> Anyone can use a tag that has been rejected in such a poll, and
> sometimes it gets even built into the renderers, and vice versa.
Indeed, but the whole system suggests otherwise. When reading the wiki
and listening to what many other people write about the proposal and
voting system, you have to think that the whole thing means something.
The terms 'Accepted' and 'Rejected' are one example for that. They sound
like they are much more than an indication. Even though no Proposal can
really be 'rejected' in OSM (you can still use it if you want), almost
everyone who will read 'rejected feature' will probably refrain from
using the proposal.
I would prefer if there weren't any 'Accepted' or 'Rejected' proposal,
but only 'Proposed' that are open for discussion and 'Finished' (or some
better term) that have the details worked out so far, so you can be sure
that they don't change completely over night.
> If we would just ignore the whole process saying that nobody cares
> anyway, that would be much more to my liking.
But that should also be documented on the wiki. We can't expect that
people abandon or understand the proposal system, when the wiki tells
More information about the talk