[OSM-talk] Proposal for import guidelines

[Richard Fairhurst]

Tordanik wrote:
> If you want to address changes performed by scripts/bots, then  
> why don't you just say so explicitly and avoid any potential 
> misunderstandings?

Because it's not just about scripts and bots. The Cadastre situation, which
started all of this off, is often people loading .osm files into JOSM,
running a quick validator check over it, and uploading. In terms of impact
on the map and on the community, there is no significant difference between
this and the same operation using upload.py.

(On a matter of language: "if you want to... then why don't you just say
so?" comes across as really quite hostile in English. I won't assume that
it's meant as such, as I recognise that English isn't everyone's first
language on this list. However, this is intended as a constructive
suggestion to solve an impasse which we've reached and a rather less hostile
tone would be nice. It doesn't actually make any difference to me personally
- I only _use_ OSM data for the UK, where we don't have imports, and I'm not
on DWG so I don't have to deal with the angry mails. I'm simply trying to
help and getting hostile doesn't really encourage that.)

Richard





--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Proposal-for-import-guidelines-tp5727448p5727607.html
Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.