[OSM-talk] New OSM Quick-Fix service

Yuri Astrakhan yuriastrakhan at gmail.com
Tue Oct 24 17:25:17 UTC 2017


Ryszard, I have disabled the fixing from the "embed" mode - you can still
open the query (using "edit query"), click the "run" button (blue play
button), and fix things from there.

In my spare time, I am still working on the next version, based on all the
useful feedback:
* It will be easy to find the changes made for a specific task, and review
or revert them.
* It will be possible to "vote" on a change for an experimental task.
E.g., unless the task is marked as safe, two people will have to agree on a
change before it happens, assuming there are no "no" votes.
* It will be possible to have multiple choice tasks.
* multiple changes for the same task can go into the same changeset
* All votes will be stored in the same RDF database, making it possible to
use vote information in tasks.

I will write up a bit more about this project in a bit.  I think there was
a number of misconceptions about it, namely that it only relates to
Wikidata, and that its a bot rather than a platform for the community to
create and review tasks.

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Ryszard Mikke <ryszard.mikke at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Even without disabling - what a better tool fixes, JOSM's autofix won't
> find...
>
> On 17 October 2017 at 09:50, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrakhan at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa     http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/
> R.Mikke at pl.vwfsag.de        Ryszard.Mikke at gmail.com
>
>                                 دراجة أكبر
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171024/9d08cb8c/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the talk mailing list