[OSM-talk] Proposed mechanical edit - elimination of osmarender:nameDirection - blatant tagging for the renderer

Andy Townsend ajt1047 at gmail.com
Sat Mar 23 12:04:04 UTC 2019

On 3/23/19 11:46 AM, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> Mar 23, 2019, 9:59 AM by simon at poole.ch:
>     ...  Producing false updates (aka no real content) just obscures
>     that fact and makes it more difficult to determine which areas
>     need to be revisted.
> It seems to me as not a real problem. There are many, many different 
> indicators of such places
> and automatic edits are suitable to remove only very small part of them.
It's a real problem, for a couple of reasons - one is that "this object 
might be out of date" warnings in e.g. Vespucci won't trigger, and the 
other is that by definition automated edits don't look to see if the 
object being edited was sensible.  "Not sensible"might mean "a shop in 
the middle of the sea", "a peak at the bottom of a quarry" or "an 
unfeasible park added for Pokemon purposes" (perhaps one that covers an 
obviously residential area).

With a DWG hat on it falls to me more than most to remove unfeasible 
data, and that's much harder to do if someone has been "correcting" it 
in the mean time.

In the specific case of "osmarender:nameDirection" using "natural 
wastage" by deleting when next edited sounds a better way to do it.  In 
the case of _actually misleading data_ (like the results of a crap 
import) then undoing the crap import obviously does make sense, and the 
"post offices in the desert" in the US surely falls into that category.  
Whether it's better to undo via revert, something like Maproulette or 
something like Streetcomplete will depend on the nature of the 
individual problem.

Best Regards,


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20190323/be62278b/attachment.html>

More information about the talk mailing list