My opinion is that the agree-er's change of the (apparently, but who
knows for sure?) mis-spelling of the nmae= tag to name= brings the
information into the realm of agreement by the adoption of the most
recent edit of the tag. It is the responsibility, I would think, of the
correcting user to ensure the validity of the change and is no different
than an agree-er entering their own name= tag based on what some
non-agree-ing person told them about the object.
The disappearance of the nmae= tag makes the original addition a
harmless edit. The edit is no longer present.
The appearance of a name= tag must be, IMHO, considered acceptable if
done by an agree-ing user. There is no way nor reason to infer that it
was simply a correction of a spelling error without also assuming that
the responsibility and agreement status for the information has
transitioned to the most recent editor.
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and Win32
(Watching the discussion from the side-lines)
On 12/16/2011 12:58 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Andy,
On 12/16/2011 06:40 PM, SomeoneElse wrote:
http://wtfe.gryph.de/harmless/way/9178258
suggests "This object remains problematic even after looking at harmless
edits."
Yes. The script is not clever enough to find out what you did. It
would have classed the non-agreer's change as harmless if it had been
in between two *identical* versions of the object (i.e. if a full
revert had taken place later). In your case, with the "history" and
"created_by" coming into play, this was not the case and so the change
was considered not harmless.
I'll have to look into how I could improve this.
The obvious choice would be: "if someone adds something and whatever
they added is not present in the current version any more, then that
edit was harmless".
However: What if the non-agreer adds the tag
nmae=Aunt Gertrud's Home for Orphans
and an agreer later fixes this to
name=Aunt Gertrud's Home for Orphans
... the simple analysis sketched above would say "clearly the
non-agreer's change is harmless because the nmae tag is not present
any more". But in this situation that would be wrong (I think).
So while in your case the "harmlessness" is obvious to the human eye,
I struggle to find a good algorithm that captures it. Any ideas?
Bye
Frederik
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
