[OSM-talk] Quality of OSM Notes

[Greg Troxel]

Bryce Nesbitt <bryce2 at obviously.com> writes:

> 6) Lazy Requests to do cleanup that the note writer did not want to do
> themselves.

That's unnecessarily perjorative.  I've seen a number of notes around me
that could be characterized that way, and I've entered a number myself.
I view it as a public shared todo list.  I've fixed some of them myself,
others (esp. oceanvortex) have fixed some, and some remain.   It's far
faster to drop a note than to do the work, and often it's simply a
matter of half an hour with bing and tiger or the massgis parcels layer
to resolve.

I consider this use case to be a successful example of notes.

That said, there is a lot of junk.  But I just close them if I can't
figure them out and if I'm fairly sure I wouldn't be able to if I showed
up.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 180 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20150220/51f34ada/attachment.sig>