[OSM-talk] Automatic problem fixing is an automated edit
ajt1047 at gmail.com
Fri Jul 30 15:35:38 UTC 2021
On 30/07/2021 14:51, Casper Kersten wrote:
> Dear Frederik Ramm,
> So the community has to ask for your permission each time we press
> ctrl+F? That seems a little unrealistic, don't you think?
Perhaps it would help to give a bit of background on some of the
problems that the DWG sometimes sees as a result of this "automated
fixing". An example of one of them is:
According to the discussion on
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/16601166 , that's a steak house
in Banfora in Burkina Faso. Unfortunately, it was "corrected" to be a
fast food place because of the name and then further "improved" to have
the cuisine and brand tags for the well known fast food place with a
similar name. All of the mappers involved thought that they were making
OSM better by either correcting information or adding more - they were
all unaware that they were removing the results of the original local
survey from OSM.
There's absolutely a place for "automated problem detection" in OSM,
provided that you review the results afterwards and are happy that the
changes that you're proposing to make really are correct and aren't just
guesswork. For example yesterday I uploaded
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/108841357 via StreetComplete.
It's an area that I'd updated in OSM before, and I thought that I'd
added all the path surface info, but StreetComplete found some that I'd
More widely, as you've found from the comments at
and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/108430155 etc., things that
look "obvious" to you might not seem quite so obvious to other people,
and may well merit further discussion. As an aside, your change from
"color" to "colour" as described (albeit after the event) on
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/108430155 is much less
problematic than some others that OSM occasionally sees (assuming that
all coniferous trees are evergreen was one) - it was pretty close to an
example I've previously given of something that was obviously just a
typo fix - changing "highway=pirmary" to "highway=primary" - that
wouldn't require a discussion with the community first. However, people
did object, both at the lack of discussion and of the size of the
OSM is a community, and we need to work together to create the best
map. That means that we need to listen to each other, and if something
that seems obvious to us but we're asked to explain, we need to do
that. It's clear (from the reactions afterwards if for no other reason)
that it would have been helpful to discuss
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/108430155 beforehand, on a
channel that's open to everyone in OSM. Also "Dear Frederik Ramm, So
the community has to ask for your permission each time we press ctrl+F"
is probably not the best way to start a good-faith
listening-to-all-sides discussion about anything.
Separately to all of that, you've mentioned "the huge and growing amount
of bad data that OSM has" and replied to Simon's "Again that is just
hyperbole, there is no indication at all of that" with "The problem is
big enough to attract your and many other people's attention while I'm
fixing it. I also provided a Wiki link to what I mean, maybe you should
have a look at it".
For the avoidance of doubt, that wiki link is
which is just a list of other wiki pages such as
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway with no actual content.
There's nothing there that describes in qualitative or quantitative
terms "the huge and growing amount of bad data that OSM has". It'd be
good to know what you see the problem as.
Andy (SomeoneElse in OSM)
More information about the talk