[OSM-talk] iD invents nosquare=yes for buildings which should not be squared

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 09 May 2019, Simon Poole wrote:
>
> The question was not about validating square or not square buildings,
> it is about storing a hint for iDs validation mechanism permanently
> in OSMs data. There is some precedent for doing so, as was mentioned
> in the github issue, still it is a bit controversial and discussion
> when adding such a feature should be expected.

Note the nosquare=yes concept is fundamentally different from things 
like noexit=yes because it classifies and aggregates multiple 
continuous values (the angles of all the corners of a building) into 
one binary yes/no value.  For the definition of nosquare=yes i will 
ultimately have to look into the iD validator source code to find out 
how exactly it checks if a building is square or not.  Strictly 
speaking it is not even a verifiable tag (which noexit=yes is).

> I believe the issue is more about the unwillingness to take community
> feedback seriously at all when it doesn't coincide with the opinions
> already held by the developers. Which brings us back full circle to
> the discussion of the privileged position of the default editor on
> openstreetmap.org and the related transparency (aka who is holding
> the purse strings) and the non-existent community control or even
> just control by the OSMF.

Indeed.

I had a bit of hope that the golf=cartpath debacle would be a bit of an 
eye opener and would lead to some increased awareness for the need of 
consultation with the broader community when making tagging related 
decisions.  But it does not look like it now.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/