[OSM-talk] Mechanical Edit?

stevea steveaOSM at softworkers.com
Sun Jul 25 19:38:50 UTC 2021


I'm not sure I see intention here, where "Validator threw some warnings, I editor-searched for those pesky tags and fixed them" are declared / included steps to bake the edit session.

Yes, "big bbox" might be a heuristic for a human to raise an eyebrow (or OSMCha flags a complaint...) but then you get into a real "how big is big?" and "is this always reasonable to quash?"  I myself do things to rail and bicycle routes on a sometimes national and continental level.  Those bboxes get large.  So, much of what might get bot-flagged is simply "hm, a touch suspect, take a look human..." and if and when we do, we conclude "nothing to see here."

I suppose when I search using OverpassTurbo and find bits of fluff and drek in the map (data), I'm performing an automated edit when I fix these noisy bits?  I can stop, but do you want me to?  Let's be careful where we draw this line.  Anti-graffiti/vandalism heuristics?  Yes, absolutely, we must.  Total eradication of what OSM QA tools might cause to raise a human eyebrow or two?  A bridge too far, in my opinion.

I don't know, Mike, but I'm glad we're discussing it.

> On Jul 25, 2021, at 12:24 PM, Brian M. Sperlongano <zelonewolf at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I object to reverting this changeset.  If the changes are wrong, that's another story, but so far the complaint seems to be entirely that you don't like the mapper's methods.  Creating another global bbox seems like a weird fix for the complaint of another mapper creating bounding boxes that are too large.
> 
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 2:41 PM Mike Thompson <miketho16 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 10:19 AM Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> yes, any form of editing that could (theoretically) make you "fix" a 
> totally implausible object (e.g. a house in the ocean) is a mechanical edit.
> 
> Especially, anyone on a mission to eradicate "deprecated" tags should be 
> viewed with suspicion.
> Thanks Frederik.  
> 
> Does anyone have any objection to me reverting this changeset?  
> 
> Mike
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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




More information about the talk mailing list