[OSM-talk] New OSM Quick-Fix service

Tue Oct 17 07:50:42 UTC 2017

Well, you kind of can fix one with the other - by introducing a better tool
and disabling some of the autofixes in JOSM (very easy to do).  A more
complex approach would clearly require a separate topic(s) and a
substantial dev involvement.

P.S. No, https://master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/ doesn't have any real
data (it shows maps from live servers, but editing shows just a few
objects).

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:36 AM, Tobias Zwick <osm at westnordost.de> wrote:

> I get your point, especially regarding the appliance of the JOSM
> fix-button as a "by-the-way" fixing.
>
> Though, you can't fix possible issues with of one tool by introducing
> another tool. People will not stop using (that feature of) JOSM. That is
> why I think, if you think you detected a problematic issue there in that
> editor, it should be discussed in a separate topic.
>
> On 17/10/2017 00:57, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> > Michael, I can only judge by my own experience adding validation autofix
> > rules - I added a number of Wikipedia tag auto cleanups to JOSM, and
> > they were reviewed by one or two JOSM developers and merged, probably
> > because they were deemed benign.  I don't know about the other rules,
> > but I suspect many of them also went this route.  Should have they been
> > discussed more widely? I don't know, but that question is complicated,
> > just like "what is a local community?" question. What a few devs may see
> > as benign, others may say needs a discussion, right?
> >
> > Mass editing is a different matter.  We consider mass editing when one
> > person goes out to fix something everywhere in the world.  But when we
> > provide a tool that automatically fixes something that you are looking
> > at, we don't view it as such.  Or at least we don't view it when it
> > happens as part of JOSM, but we do when it happens in my new tool. Of
> > course there is an important difference - JOSM doesn't guide you towards
> > those cases.
> >
> > I think massive "by-the-way" fixing is far worse than the targeted fix
> > of a single issue.
> >
> > When you want to fix a single issue in many places, you become a subject
> > matter expert.  You know all about that change, how it interacts with
> > other tags, what to watch out for, how to handle bad values, etc.  For
> > example, when fixing wikipedia tags, you would see the types of mistakes
> > people make, wrong prefixes people use, incorrect url encodings, hash
> > tags in urls, incorrect multiple values, ... .    When you simply click
> > "fix" because JOSM validator tells you it can fix it automatically, you
> > don't have that knowledge, so it effectively becomes a distributed
> > mechanical edit without the "reject" capability.  My tool tries to
> > address this - to build domain experts in a narrow field, and let those
> > experts review changes one by one. I do not discount the value of local
> > knowledge, but it is not a panacea - you must be both to make
> > intelligent choices, and in some cases, the domain knowledge is more
> > important than the knowledge of a specific locale.
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Michael Reichert
> > <osm-ml at michreichert.de <mailto:osm-ml at michreichert.de>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi Yuri,
> >
> >     Am 16.10.2017 um 16:02 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan:
> >     > Rory, most of those queries were copied from the current JOSM
> validator
> >     > autofixes.  I don't think they were discussed, but they might have
> been
> >     > mass applied without much thought by all sorts of editors.
> >
> >     Could you please give examples for (a) the mass appliance of these
> rules
> >     and (b) rules which have not been discussed but should have been
> >     discussed?
> >     > There are two ways to use the tool - you can write your own query,
> run it,
> >     > and fix whatever it is you want to fix. That's the power user mode
> -
> >     > anything goes, no different from JOSM or Level0. And there is
> another one -
> >     > where you go to osm wiki, read the instructions, find the task you
> may want
> >     > to work on, and go at it.   The community reviews wiki content,
> tags
> >     > different pages with different explanation or warning boxes, etc.
> The
> >     > discussion could still be on the forum, or here, or in IRC, ....
> >
> >     Just for future readers: IRC and Telegram channels are no replacement
> >     for a mailing list or a forum with a public readable archive where
> you
> >     can look up the discussions years later.
> >
> >     Best regards
> >
> >     Michael
> >
> >
> >
> >     --
> >     Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt.
> (Mailinglisten
> >     ausgenommen)
> >     I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)
> >
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     talk mailing list
> >     talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk at openstreetmap.org>
> >     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >     <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > talk at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20171017/23caf628/attachment-0001.html>