[OSM-talk] [Talk-us] Redacting 75, 000 street names contributed by user chdr

Nicolás Alvarez nicolas.alvarez at gmail.com
Sun Aug 27 19:01:16 UTC 2017


I don't understand what people mean with 'verifying' objects. We're
not trying to find factually-incorrect data. The data is legally
tainted. It's questionable whether looking at the current names
imported from GMaps, comparing to another source, seeing they match
and marking them as "verified" will legally change anything. And it's
impossible to know if people are really verifying anything or just
blindly marking them as verified.

I think the only clean way to solve this is to redact and then re-map
from legal sources.

-- 
Nicolás

2017-08-27 14:39 GMT-03:00 Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>:
> Steve:
>
> thank you for your work. I'll save your list. It appears that others
> might be eager to do the same, maybe we can find a good workflow for
> that. I wasn't expecting the community to start working on this
> pre-redaction but if people prefer that to fixing issues later, it is of
> course an option. I certainly prefer out-of-band "marking" of verified
> objects to adding a new tag to each!
>
> Tod:
>
> On 08/27/2017 07:31 PM, Tod Fitch wrote:
>> When you reviewed Orange County, how did you do it so quickly? The only way I know to go through this is looking at each one, one at a time.
>
> I could of course make a page with links to the ways, even per county if
> that helps, or we could upload the list to some suitable tool. Ian
> mentioned MapRoulette but I'm not sure if that would make things easier.
> I'm certainly happy to try. Maybe Martijn would like to chip in about
> MapRoulette?
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



More information about the talk mailing list