[OSM-talk] Proposal for import guidelines

[Jochen Topf]

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 06:11:35PM +0100, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> [...]
> An 'automated edit' is one where the editing is not carried out by
> manual drawing actions. This includes (but is not limited to):
> 
> - imports of external data
> - search-and-replace tag changes
> - automated geometry fixup
> - reverting edits
> 
> and applies equally to scripted edits and to those carried out
> within an editor program.
> [...]

What exactly is meant with "reverting edits"? Bringing back deleted objects in
Potlatch is something I have done during normal OSM editing. Thats certainly
not an automated edit.

I think it is rather difficult do exactly define what an "automated edit" is
and what not. And trying to define this better and better is just an invitation
to language lawyers to argue about minutiae.

I suggest we have an "example section" in this policy document that describes
several common cases that are and several that aren't automated edits. Thats
easier for most people to understand than complex rules.

And the policy should have a clear guideline on what to do if you think your
case falls into the grey area between those cases. Something like this: "If you
are unsure whether something you want to do falls under this 'automated edit'
guideline we encourage you to discuss your case on the mailing list at ... or
... . If you can not get the information you need from there you can also
contact the Data Working Group at ... "

Jochen
-- 
Jochen Topf  jochen at remote.org  http://www.remote.org/jochen/  +49-721-388298