[OSM-talk] Mechanically Cleaning Up FIXME Tags

[Greg Troxel]

Bryce Nesbitt <bryce2 at obviously.com> writes:

> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 1:10 AM, SomeoneElse <lists at atownsend.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 25/02/2015 05:00, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
>>
>>> Any fixme in wide use I'm not interested in deleting.
>>
>> I'd strongly oppose the mechanical deletion of "low volume" fixme values.
>> Mappers local to me often use individually worded fixmes describing
>> something that needs investigation.  By definition these values are "not in
>> wide use", but definitely should be kept.  If I'm going to be in an area I
>> always load the local notes and fixmes onto the Garmin so that if I'm near
>> something that needs some attibute checking, I know about it.
>
> Hold on, you may have misunderstood.
> The only fixme tags proposed for deletion are the mechanically added ones
> on thousands of nodes.
> Any onesey twosey value would of course stay.
> Any value like "continue" that's has high counts, but edited by hundreds of
> unique users, would stay.

I am still not sure I am following.  There is a difference between:

  1) identify foo as a fixme= value that is often associated with
  mechanical edit
  2) therefore, remove all fixme=foo

and

  3) identify foo as a fixme= value that is often associated with
  mechanical edit
  4) remove all fixme=foo tags *which were actually added by a
  mechanical edit*

Do you mean 1/2 or do you mean 3/4?
If 3/4, I think this is fine.  If 1/2, I think it's going to remove
hand-mapper fixme tags, which seems not ok.
-------------- 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/20150227/1a1e9365/attachment.sig>