[OSM-talk] Hashtags are not sufficient changeset comments
matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Sun Apr 18 15:19:08 UTC 2021
Apr 18, 2021, 13:22 by frederik at remote.org:
> A changeset comment with 10 hashtags that aren't documented anywhere is worse than no changeset at all
It is a bit better, than nothing as it often reveals who is organising map-damaging activity
(often chasing statistics like edit counts, "buildings mapped" etc and ignoring map quality)
> . With such a changeset comment you're shouting at other mappers "if you don't understand this letter salad then you're not part of my team, go away!"
> When I encounter changesets that consist exclusively, or even mainly, of changeset comments, I write a short changeset discussion entry explaining how changesets comments are aimed at, and should be readable by, other human beings, and therefore they should be written in a natural language. (Usually that would one of the languages commonly used in the region being edited, or English.)
> If you are a mapper: Lead with a good example, and write human-readable changeset comments. Whenever you encounter changeset comments that are not human-readable, politely ask the other mapper to change their approach. (If an active mapper stubbornly refuses to write human-readable changesets, you can report them to the DWG and we'll ask them again.)
> If you are involved in teaching other mappers, or creating organised activities: Make sure that new mappers understand that changeset comments are not some unnecessary stuffing; they are how you address other people in this project. Keep your hashtags to minimum that is necessary. Improve your statistics software to count better, instead of instructing users to swamp changeset comments with 10 different hashtags.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk