Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

On Oct 24, 2017 3:08 AM, "Blake Girardot HOT/OSM" 
wrote:


Here is my American, collaborative version of the same issue:


Hi,

I see the new HOT Tasking Manager.

I feel like it does not clearly describe how it it used in the
OpenStreetMap community. It is just a tool for OSM mapping, it is not
the whole of OSM and I think people might be confused possibly.

It also seems like the OpenStreetMap project and community should be
linked to a little more so people can understand and have a path to
becoming good OSM Community folks.

Can we work on improving that in HOT's new Tasking Manager? I have
some ideas that are mostly wording changes or additions and hopefully
would be easy to add.


As a non-American and non European, this (or Mikel's version) is definitely
more pleasant to read but still brings up the same substantive points as
the original email. Because we are an international collaborative
community, I think that we should make the extra effort to be a bit more
polite in how we deal with others and in pointing out problems/points of
improvement especially on written medium where intention/emotion is not
easy to convey (as Mikel pointed out).

~Eugene
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Blake Girardot HOT/OSM]

Hi Christoph,

Thank you for the suggestions.

As the Project Manager for the Tasking Manager 3, I can say most of
them should be no problem all and look like they basically line up
with what we talked about internally to address the issues raised..

Hopefully we will have some changes out in the next week that
incorporate your suggestions, some of them are easy and quick to do,
some might not be, but I'll make sure they are a priority.

And to LearnOSM.

I am glad there is some confusion over who created and maintains it.

That content was mostly generated by HOT members as a project, and
HOT's Training Working Group has maintained and updated it and its
translations for years. Half of it is still in the original google
docs and we have been trying to convert it all to markdown for years
as well.

It is purposely not HOT branded as we consider it an OSM Community
focused resource. We have added some information about the Tasking
Manager and using the Tasking Manager, but I am glad to hear we kept
HOT out of it for the most part really and it put OSM forward, as is
our goal.

The HOT Training Working Group is always looking for more folks who
are interested in joining the working group and helping maintain
LearnOSM. Nick has been heading up LearnOSM and the HOT TWG for the
past 3 years I think and just recently stepped down.

Thanks again and I'll reply when there is something on our staging
site for folks to look at.

Cheers
blake

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> On Monday 23 October 2017, Blake Girardot HOT/OSM wrote:
>>
>> It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked
>> to change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
>> misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
>> Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.
>
> As i said in the previous discussion about this the name "OSM Tasking
> manager" to me seems perfectly fine as a name for the tool in general.
>
> My critique here is about this instance of the tool running as a public
> service and containing the tasks of the HOT project.
>
> I have no specific suggestion about the heading/catchphrase but there
> were already a few ideas mentioned by others in what direction this
> could go.  Independent of that prominently linking to learnosm.org (or
> a different page explaining OSM and providing relevant links) on the
> starting page (like with a second button next to "Start Mapping") would
> be good.
>
> In addition i would suggest to add
>
> * links to openstreetmap.org (and OSM wiki, communication channels) from
> the About and Learn pages.
> * a disclaimer according to the trademark policy on the About page.
> * adding at least brief verbal credits to OSM - for example like
> Frederik cited from Missing Maps - to the starting page somewhere.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



-- 

Blake Girardot
Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Yuri Astrakhan]

Andy, both sr: and sq: languages describe the same CONCEPT - "republic of
Serbia".  Both articles mention Kosovo as a territory with the special
status.  So the content is the same, and both can be used to describe the
ground truth of Republic of Serbia. The articles just choose to show a
slightly different map image -- but that's exactly where OSM comes in - we
are the ones who can draw the ground truth correctly, and simply reference
the object to the Wiki.  Or should we base OSM data on Wikipedia?

If we draw two OSM objects - with Kosovo and without, we ourselves step
into the ground truth debate, and need to decide which object corresponds
to the Wiki article better, or perhaps mark both with the same Wikipedia
article. Again, this debate is mostly about disputed territories and how to
tag them, not the Wiki* links.

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 7:33 AM, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> On 23/10/2017 11:40, Ryszard Mikke wrote:
>
>> That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia
>>
>
> Part of the problem is that some of these problems simply aren't fixable
> at wikipedia.  For example https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> %D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0 and https://sq.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Serbia are allegedly the same article and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
> Q403 lists them both. However, as can be seen by looking at the maps on
> each page, they aren't the same geographic entity - one includes Kosovo,
> one does not.  Neither is "wrong" from the point of view of the authors of
> each page yet they can't both be "correct" at the same time.
>
> Best Regards,
> Andy
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] How to create custom online map from OpenStreetMap

[Andy Townsend]

On 22/10/2017 18:47, Carlos Cámara wrote:
I would like to create a custom map for online use that loads OSM data 
but displays it in different ways as the standard, cyclemap, 
transport... layers.


Another couple of resources to look at (if you think you'll go down the 
"Mapnik" route):


To create a tile server with the same stylesheet as OSM's "standard" one:
https://switch2osm.org/manually-building-a-tile-server-16-04-2-lts/

Modifying map styles, and much more:
https://ircama.github.io/osm-carto-tutorials/

Best Regards,
Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Blake Girardot HOT/OSM]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> This is a honest question; I would really be interested in the, if I
> may, "American version" of what Christoph has written. One that does
> express how you're upset while at the same time *not* being "combative"
> and all those bad things you said about Christoph's post.
>
> Maybe then I can use that to express myself in a more internationally
> compatible way in the future ;)

Here is my American, collaborative version of the same issue:

Hi,

I see the new HOT Tasking Manager.

I feel like it does not clearly describe how it it used in the
OpenStreetMap community. It is just a tool for OSM mapping, it is not
the whole of OSM and I think people might be confused possibly.

It also seems like the OpenStreetMap project and community should be
linked to a little more so people can understand and have a path to
becoming good OSM Community folks.

Can we work on improving that in HOT's new Tasking Manager? I have
some ideas that are mostly wording changes or additions and hopefully
would be easy to add.

Cheers,
Blake

I promise you that will get the exact same results or better, as
accusations of misrepresenting OSM by HOT and making sure I know you
are upset or mad.

And have the benefit that everyone who can do something about it, will
be happy to help make it happen.

Cheers
Blake

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Mikel Maron]

Hey Frederik
Really good questions. 
First off, I don't necessarily see this as an American - European thing .. 
there are plenty of people with different approaches to communication 
everywhere. 
What does guide me is experience communicating online, in text, with people 
from a variety of backgrounds. It is *very* easy to misunderstand intent 
online. It is *very* easy to have an limbic reaction to something we read 
online. (There is in fact a lot introspection right now about the effect of 
this dynamic on democracy as a whole). When I feel it's necessary, I go out of 
my way to not only share my issue, or what I want to happen, but also my 
thought process getting there, and my understanding of other points of view.
The start of this thread began in the context trademark policy. I don't mean to 
get into a discussion about the details of trademark policy, though that is an 
important topic. Starting off discussion of the Tasking Manager in this way 
feels pretty aggressive. As HOT, and very importantly the individuals who 
participate in HOT, are well known in the OSM community, you can assume they 
are on this mailing list, are open to discussion, and want to make things 
better.
In fact, I totally agree with Christoph that the new Tasking Manager needs to 
improve how it communicates about OSM, and there have been some constructive 
suggestions in the thread. I think posting on talk@ is one fine way to open 
that discussion. He could also have contacted HOT people directly, posted on 
the hot@ list, opened GitHub issues. The point is, HOT is not a faceless, 
unresponsive entity, but people you run across every day in OSM, with whom you 
can discuss things, and work together constructively.
So here's maybe a turn at rephrasing the original email.
> Subject: How can we better talk about OSM on the new Tasking Manager?>> I 
> recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page  
> (http://tasks.hotosm.org/)> and found the page is now presenting itself as 
> the "OpenStreetMap Collaborative > Mapping"  portal with  no indication 
> except for the small logo on top that this is one of> many projects in the 
> OpenStreetMap community.>> At the same time it seems (at a  first glance) I 
> could not find any links on the site> to OpenStreetMap.  >
> To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the 
> impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap 
> Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
>> From past discussions on this topic, I figure HOT does not want to give 
>> this> impression. Here are some ways I think the tasking manager and it's 
>> relationship> to OSM could be better communicated.
Hope this helps clear this up.
Thanks-Mikel

* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron 

On Monday, October 23, 2017, 11:24:33 AM MDT, Frederik Ramm 
 wrote:  
 
 Hi,

On 10/23/2017 05:06 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
> On Oct 23, 2017 08:59, "Mikel Maron"  > wrote:
> 
> 
>    However ... I hope we can also agree that it is counter productive
>    to start off such discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear
>    a lot of distrust in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming
>    ownership", "exactly what HOT doesn't do". It's emotionally draining
>    for me to read things like this, and I don't think I'm alone. There
>    is always more we can learn from each other, about what to do and
>    how to do it. We are all here in OpenStreetMap because we love the
>    map. Can we please use that as a starting point in our interactions,
>    and focus on helping each other to make the map together?
> 
> 
> Yes, thanks for bringing this up Mikel. Combative questions and the
> assumption that the other party is trying to attack OSM makes threads
> like this extremely difficult to participate in. People interested in
> having a conversation about OSM avoid the mailing lists because of
> threads like this and it hurts our community.

I find it tiring to read these "see that's why nobody does mailing lists
any more" tirades, and it is very difficult for me to separate criticism
of the style in which something is written, from criticism of the actual
message. I feel that there's too much language policing going on, and
too little respect for cultural diversity. Christoph is, like me, from
Europe, and those of you who are quick to cast him (or "threads like
this") off as harmful to the community, seem to be from the USA. Is it
possible that we simply have different ways to express things? Can civil
conversations about OSM only be had by US citizens and those who swallow
their values, and everyone else is a problem? Or do we have the same set
of values but somehow this project manages to attract the more polite
among the North Americans, and the ill-bred of the Europeans?

Now let's try to be constructive about this and see how we can make it
better. Ian and Mikel; try for a second to put yourself in Christophs's
shoes. Assume you're a me

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[john whelan]

HOT and OSM have slightly different aims but HOT does build on OSM.

There are mentions of OpenStreetMap wiki and learnOSM and the O in HOT is
OpenStreetMap.

Having said that adding something along the lines of

"OpenStreetMap is the volunteer-driven open data mapping platform which
makes all of this possible, supported by the not-for-profit
OpenStreetMap Foundation."

even at the bottom of the first page would be helpful.

I accept that HOT has created a number of tools that conventional mappers
use.  LearnOSM has benefited from input from HOT members and I suspect some
of the imagery that is now available to armchair mappers has its roots in
HOT but the quality of mapping from some of its "disposable" high turnover
mappers does leave much to be desired at times so an acknowledgement of
OpenStreetMap's role would not be out of place.

Cheerio John
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10/23/2017 05:06 PM, Ian Dees wrote:
> On Oct 23, 2017 08:59, "Mikel Maron"  > wrote:
> 
> 
> However ... I hope we can also agree that it is counter productive
> to start off such discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear
> a lot of distrust in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming
> ownership", "exactly what HOT doesn't do". It's emotionally draining
> for me to read things like this, and I don't think I'm alone. There
> is always more we can learn from each other, about what to do and
> how to do it. We are all here in OpenStreetMap because we love the
> map. Can we please use that as a starting point in our interactions,
> and focus on helping each other to make the map together?
> 
> 
> Yes, thanks for bringing this up Mikel. Combative questions and the
> assumption that the other party is trying to attack OSM makes threads
> like this extremely difficult to participate in. People interested in
> having a conversation about OSM avoid the mailing lists because of
> threads like this and it hurts our community.

I find it tiring to read these "see that's why nobody does mailing lists
any more" tirades, and it is very difficult for me to separate criticism
of the style in which something is written, from criticism of the actual
message. I feel that there's too much language policing going on, and
too little respect for cultural diversity. Christoph is, like me, from
Europe, and those of you who are quick to cast him (or "threads like
this") off as harmful to the community, seem to be from the USA. Is it
possible that we simply have different ways to express things? Can civil
conversations about OSM only be had by US citizens and those who swallow
their values, and everyone else is a problem? Or do we have the same set
of values but somehow this project manages to attract the more polite
among the North Americans, and the ill-bred of the Europeans?

Now let's try to be constructive about this and see how we can make it
better. Ian and Mikel; try for a second to put yourself in Christophs's
shoes. Assume you're a member of the OSM community, and you come across
a web site by a third party that you know but are not involved in, let's
say a web site by a charity called "Reporters without Borders".

Say you open their web page and are greeted with a banner that says
"OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" and a button "Start Mapping", and
a series of Reporters without Borders projects that you can participate
in. They talk about how they partner with other organisations or people
on the ground but don't mention the fact that OpenStreetMap was about
collaborative mapping even before "Reporters without Borders" came along
at all.

Say that - even though you're normally calm and not easily offended -
you're now slightly hurt that here's a charity building something on top
of the project that you are spending half of your spare time, and they
seem to be making it sound as if it was them who have invented
collaborative mapping.

Say that - even though your first impulse might be to do more research
or ask friends on a private communications platform of your choice about
this - you decide to make your fellow OpenStreetMappers aware of this
perceived problem, on the mailing list.

How would you go about it? What would you write? How would you
communicate to your fellow OpenStreetMappers that you feel wronged by
this charity, while at the same time not offending or emotionally
draining those among your fellow OpenStreetMappers who are involved with
that same charity?

The reason you want to share this with your peers is that this sharing
will reduce your hurt; others will (you hope) either say "yep, you are
right to feel offended, they need to change that", or they will say "ah,
it's not so bad, everyone does it anyway" which, while perhaps not as
satisfying, will also help to settle the matter for you. You cannot be
expected to send a quiet email to the makers of the page instead; you
have a right to share joy *and* pain with your fellow mappers on the
mailing list. That's the very core of social, of community.

What would be *your* words to say "Hey everybody, I saw this, and I
think it is bad and needs to change"? What choice of language would
adequately express your being upset about what you have seen, without
being denounced as a poisonous person who harms the community by seeking
support from it?

This is a honest question; I would really be interested in the, if I
may, "American version" of what Christoph has written. One that does
express how you're upset while at the same time *not* being "combative"
and all those bad things you said about Christoph's post.

Maybe then I can use that to express myself in a more internationally
compatible way in the future ;)

Bye
Frederik


-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@op

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Monday 23 October 2017, Blake Girardot HOT/OSM wrote:
>
> It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked
> to change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
> misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
> Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.

As i said in the previous discussion about this the name "OSM Tasking 
manager" to me seems perfectly fine as a name for the tool in general. 

My critique here is about this instance of the tool running as a public 
service and containing the tasks of the HOT project.

I have no specific suggestion about the heading/catchphrase but there 
were already a few ideas mentioned by others in what direction this 
could go.  Independent of that prominently linking to learnosm.org (or 
a different page explaining OSM and providing relevant links) on the 
starting page (like with a second button next to "Start Mapping") would 
be good.

In addition i would suggest to add

* links to openstreetmap.org (and OSM wiki, communication channels) from 
the About and Learn pages.
* a disclaimer according to the trademark policy on the About page.
* adding at least brief verbal credits to OSM - for example like 
Frederik cited from Missing Maps - to the starting page somewhere.

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

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Mikel Maron]

Christoph
I see that my message wasn't received as intended. My hope is not to amplify 
disagreements, but to help set a constructive and friendly tone. Let's take the 
discussion of how we're communicating "offline" -- I'll connect with you, and I 
hope set up a time to talk directly.
In any case, I don't feel I'm deflecting. As I said, "I think there are some 
very reasonable ideas and discussion on this thread, about how to describe the 
tasking manager, OSM, HOT, etc", and appreciate your work to help frame the 
complexities of OSM appropriately. 
I also think we should have better guidance on the handling of trademark 
policy, the appropriate ways and places to raise issues, and how the OSM 
Foundation and LWG handle these issues. Will bring this up.
Thanks-Mikel
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron 

On Monday, October 23, 2017, 10:23:14 AM MDT, Christoph Hormann 
 wrote:  
 
 On Monday 23 October 2017, Mikel Maron wrote:
> [...] However ... I hope we can
> also agree that it is counter productive to start off such
> discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear a lot of distrust
> in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming ownership", "exactly
> what HOT doesn't do".

This has nothing to do with trust, i looked at the website and describe 
my observations here.  The term "misrepresentation" is from the 
trademark policy:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trademark_Policy#5.3._Misrepresentation

If you think it is inappropriate to use such a term w.r.t. OSM 
trademarks this is probably something you need to discuss with the LWG.

> It's emotionally draining for me to read things 
> like this, and I don't think I'm alone.

Have you considered that it might be "emotionally draining" for OSM 
contributors to see the name of the project being used on a website 
like this without any links to OSM and mentioning of the fact that OSM 
is all about collaborative global mapping even without HOT or the 
tasking manager?

FWIW - i do not feel emotionally drained about this, but i feel rather 
offended by your, Ian's and Clifford's reactions deflecting a 
matter-of-factly critique of that website and the resulting discussion 
about this and possible ways to improve it (and i welcome the 
constructive suggestions so far) into a discussion about what words may 
be used in discussion here.

I would also like to remind you that one of the most important guiding 
principle in communication in OSM is to "assume good faith".  I 
followed this principle here by describing my observations of the 
tasking manager without any interpretation as for why it is designed 
this way - although this is of course a question i did contemplate.

It would be nice to see you doing me the same courtesy by arguing the 
topic at hand without insinuating "an argumentative 
pose", "distrust", "Combative questions" or a lack of respect.

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

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 10/23/2017 03:57 PM, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> Or they could rework the site to properly present OpenStreetMap and HOT 
> and how they relate to the visitor.  learnosm.org (which i think is 
> also mainly built by HOT) shows this is possible to do.

Missing Maps, which is also a very HOT-influenced project, tends to
present itself like this:

"Missing Maps is an open, collaborative project in which you can help to
map areas where humanitarian organisations are trying to meet the needs
of vulnerable people."

Thankfully, at the bottom of their web site, they add:

"OpenStreetMap is the volunteer-driven open data mapping platform which
makes all of this possible, supported by the not-for-profit
OpenStreetMap Foundation."

You can gripe with that a little, since it seems to degrade OSM to being
just the "platform" while the "collaboration" happens on Missing Maps,
but hey, at least they write "OSM makes all of this possible" which is
accurate.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Monday 23 October 2017, Mikel Maron wrote:
> [...] However ... I hope we can
> also agree that it is counter productive to start off such
> discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear a lot of distrust
> in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming ownership", "exactly
> what HOT doesn't do".

This has nothing to do with trust, i looked at the website and describe 
my observations here.  The term "misrepresentation" is from the 
trademark policy:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trademark_Policy#5.3._Misrepresentation

If you think it is inappropriate to use such a term w.r.t. OSM 
trademarks this is probably something you need to discuss with the LWG.

> It's emotionally draining for me to read things 
> like this, and I don't think I'm alone.

Have you considered that it might be "emotionally draining" for OSM 
contributors to see the name of the project being used on a website 
like this without any links to OSM and mentioning of the fact that OSM 
is all about collaborative global mapping even without HOT or the 
tasking manager?

FWIW - i do not feel emotionally drained about this, but i feel rather 
offended by your, Ian's and Clifford's reactions deflecting a 
matter-of-factly critique of that website and the resulting discussion 
about this and possible ways to improve it (and i welcome the 
constructive suggestions so far) into a discussion about what words may 
be used in discussion here.

I would also like to remind you that one of the most important guiding 
principle in communication in OSM is to "assume good faith".  I 
followed this principle here by describing my observations of the 
tasking manager without any interpretation as for why it is designed 
this way - although this is of course a question i did contemplate.

It would be nice to see you doing me the same courtesy by arguing the 
topic at hand without insinuating "an argumentative 
pose", "distrust", "Combative questions" or a lack of respect.

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

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Clifford Snow]

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Ian Dees  wrote:

> On Oct 23, 2017 08:59, "Mikel Maron"  wrote:
>
>
> However ... I hope we can also agree that it is counter productive to
> start off such discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear a lot of
> distrust in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming ownership", "exactly
> what HOT doesn't do". It's emotionally draining for me to read things like
> this, and I don't think I'm alone. There is always more we can learn from
> each other, about what to do and how to do it. We are all here in
> OpenStreetMap because we love the map. Can we please use that as a starting
> point in our interactions, and focus on helping each other to make the map
> together?
>
>
> Yes, thanks for bringing this up Mikel. Combative questions and the
> assumption that the other party is trying to attack OSM makes threads like
> this extremely difficult to participate in. People interested in having a
> conversation about OSM avoid the mailing lists because of threads like this
> and it hurts our community.
>
> Thanks Mikel and Ian for your respectful push back. The talk list should
be a place of collaboration with respectful dialog as we all seek to
improve OSM.

Clifford



-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Ian Dees]

On Oct 23, 2017 08:59, "Mikel Maron"  wrote:


However ... I hope we can also agree that it is counter productive to start
off such discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear a lot of
distrust in phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming ownership", "exactly
what HOT doesn't do". It's emotionally draining for me to read things like
this, and I don't think I'm alone. There is always more we can learn from
each other, about what to do and how to do it. We are all here in
OpenStreetMap because we love the map. Can we please use that as a starting
point in our interactions, and focus on helping each other to make the map
together?


Yes, thanks for bringing this up Mikel. Combative questions and the
assumption that the other party is trying to attack OSM makes threads like
this extremely difficult to participate in. People interested in having a
conversation about OSM avoid the mailing lists because of threads like this
and it hurts our community.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Mikel Maron]

Hello everyone
I think there are some very reasonable ideas and discussion on this thread, 
about how to describe the tasking manager, OSM, HOT, etc. We all can agree it's 
complicated, and explaining this right is worthy of our time and energy. (One 
additional complication to consider is that the tasking manager software is 
used in lots of different scenarios, include every day mapping, so the tag line 
may need to cover non-disaster situations as well.)
However ... I hope we can also agree that it is counter productive to start off 
such discussions in such an argumentative pose. I hear a lot of distrust in 
phrases like "misrepresentation", "claiming ownership", "exactly what HOT 
doesn't do". It's emotionally draining for me to read things like this, and I 
don't think I'm alone. There is always more we can learn from each other, about 
what to do and how to do it. We are all here in OpenStreetMap because we love 
the map. Can we please use that as a starting point in our interactions, and 
focus on helping each other to make the map together?
Thanks-Mikel
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron 

On Monday, October 23, 2017, 7:59:41 AM MDT, Christoph Hormann 
 wrote:  
 
 On Monday 23 October 2017, Simon Poole wrote:
> I suspect Christophs issue is more that HOT seems to be claiming
> ownership of "OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping".

Yes, this is one of my points.  The other is that it fails to connect 
the visitor to collaboration and communication within the OSM 
community.  The visitor is invited into what is being presented 
as "OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping" but this whole concept as it 
is being presented on that site seems to be carefully segregated from 
the rest of the OSM community with its communication channels, wiki, 
local communities etc.

No one can forbid HOT to do that but if they do so they IMO should not 
present this under the name OpenStreetMap as "OpenStreetMap 
collaborative mapping" in general or even as pars pro toto.

Or they could rework the site to properly present OpenStreetMap and HOT 
and how they relate to the visitor.  learnosm.org (which i think is 
also mainly built by HOT) shows this is possible to do.

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

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Monday 23 October 2017, Simon Poole wrote:
> I suspect Christophs issue is more that HOT seems to be claiming
> ownership of "OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping".

Yes, this is one of my points.  The other is that it fails to connect 
the visitor to collaboration and communication within the OSM 
community.  The visitor is invited into what is being presented 
as "OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping" but this whole concept as it 
is being presented on that site seems to be carefully segregated from 
the rest of the OSM community with its communication channels, wiki, 
local communities etc.

No one can forbid HOT to do that but if they do so they IMO should not 
present this under the name OpenStreetMap as "OpenStreetMap 
collaborative mapping" in general or even as pars pro toto.

Or they could rework the site to properly present OpenStreetMap and HOT 
and how they relate to the visitor.  learnosm.org (which i think is 
also mainly built by HOT) shows this is possible to do.

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

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Simon Poole]

Am 23.10.2017 um 15:06 schrieb David Groom:
> How about
> 1) Change "OpenStreetmap Collaborative Mapping" to "OpenStreetmap
> Distaster Mapping"

Use of the trademarks shouldn't imply endorsement  and/or affiliation
and in the end exclusivity in any form. "A tool to support mapping of
disaster areas in OpenStreetMap" would for example be OK (a bit long but
just to get the point across).

Simon

> 2) Link the word "OpenStreetmap"  to the OSM web site
>
> Regards
> David
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Blake Girardot HOT/OSM"  >
> To: "Christoph Hormann" mailto:o...@imagico.de>>
> Cc: "OSM Talk" mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>>
> Sent: 23/10/2017 10:37:38
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?
>
>> Hi Christoph,
>>  
>> We can not win if we do or if we do not :)
>>  
>> It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked to
>> change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
>> misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
>> Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.
>>  
>> And the major emphasis on "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" is
>> exactly because people also said we did not put OpenStreetMap
>> prominently enough. Now it is the biggest thing on the page and that
>> is not right either :)
>>  
>> It doesn't say "HOT Collaborative Mapping" because people are not HOT
>> mapping, they are OSM mapping.
>>  
>> But, I think we are happy to change that title on that page to
>> something else if the community feels it is somehow misrepresenting
>> something.
>>  
>> Respectfully,
>> blake
>>  
>>  
>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Christoph Hormann > > wrote:
>>>  
>>> I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
>>> (http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
>>> tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
>>> no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
>>> project with no official character. At the same time it seems (at a
>>> first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
>>> To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the
>>> impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
>>> Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
>>>  
>>> In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not
>>> covered by the trademark policy we now have.
>>>  
>>> --
>>> Christoph Hormann
>>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>>  
>>> ___
>>> talk mailing list
>>> talk@openstreetmap.org 
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> --
>> 
>> Blake Girardot
>> Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team
>>  
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Joseph Reeves]

Hi all,

The previous thread, IIRC:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2015-November/003556.html

Version 2 of the Task Manager had "a perfectly fine choice of name for this
kind of tool" [0], but I can't really see how V3 [1] is much different.

Cheers, Joseph


[0]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2015-November/003558.html
[1] https://github.com/hotosm/tasking-manager


On 23 October 2017 at 10:08, Christoph Hormann  wrote:

>
> I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
> (http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
> tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
> no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
> project with no official character.  At the same time it seems (at a
> first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
> To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the
> impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
> Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
>
> In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not
> covered by the trademark policy we now have.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Simon Poole]

I suspect Christophs issue is more that HOT seems to be claiming
ownership of "OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping". Though I would argue
that the rest of OSM has always been about collaborative mapping and it
is exactly what HOT doesn't do, but I digress.

In any case HOT is clearly not the only organisation engaging in
"OpenStreetMap collaborative mapping" however you define it and should
not be creating the impression that it is and trying to claim exclusive
ownership of the term.  Outside of that, given that we are discussing
the all shiny and new TM3, it would be a could occasion to follow
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Trademark_Policy#2._How_to_use_the_OSM_marks


Thanks

Simon



Am 23.10.2017 um 11:37 schrieb Blake Girardot HOT/OSM:
> Hi Christoph,
>
> We can not win if we do or if we do not :)
>
> It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked to
> change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
> misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
> Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.
>
> And the major emphasis on "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" is
> exactly because people also said we did not put OpenStreetMap
> prominently enough. Now it is the biggest thing on the page and that
> is not right either :)
>
> It doesn't say "HOT Collaborative Mapping" because people are not HOT
> mapping, they are OSM mapping.
>
> But, I think we are happy to change that title on that page to
> something else if the community feels it is somehow misrepresenting
> something.
>
> Respectfully,
> blake
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
>> I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
>> (http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
>> tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
>> no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
>> project with no official character.  At the same time it seems (at a
>> first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
>> To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the
>> impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
>> Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
>>
>> In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not
>> covered by the trademark policy we now have.
>>
>> --
>> Christoph Hormann
>> http://www.imagico.de/
>>
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[David Groom]

How about
1) Change "OpenStreetmap Collaborative Mapping" to "OpenStreetmap 
Distaster Mapping"

2) Link the word "OpenStreetmap"  to the OSM web site

Regards
David

-- Original Message --
From: "Blake Girardot HOT/OSM" 
To: "Christoph Hormann" 
Cc: "OSM Talk" 
Sent: 23/10/2017 10:37:38
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?


Hi Christoph,

We can not win if we do or if we do not :)

It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked to
change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.

And the major emphasis on "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" is
exactly because people also said we did not put OpenStreetMap
prominently enough. Now it is the biggest thing on the page and that
is not right either :)

It doesn't say "HOT Collaborative Mapping" because people are not HOT
mapping, they are OSM mapping.

But, I think we are happy to change that title on that page to
something else if the community feels it is somehow misrepresenting
something.

Respectfully,
blake


On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Christoph Hormann  
wrote:


I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
(http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
project with no official character. At the same time it seems (at a
first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate 
the

impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.

In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap 
not

covered by the trademark policy we now have.

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

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




--

Blake Girardot
Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/10/2017 12:39, Tomas Straupis wrote:



How were the people asked? I can only see very short note in Lithuanian. I
can' understand it, but it doesn't seem like "do not touch" request...

   Have you noticed the title of this thread? ;-)


For completeness, I pointed this out 11 months ago, in English, on 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43836371#map=8/54.872/22.250 .  
The advice was ignored.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Ed Loach]

> At the same time it seems (at a
> first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.

At a quick glance the "Learn" page explains the first thing you need is an 
OpenStreetMap account, and when I clicked "Login" it asked me to allow access 
to Tasking Manager 3 (probably as I was already logged in to OSM - otherwise 
I'm guessing you get to login or signup).

Ed


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Tomas Straupis]

>>   There was a link to disambiguation page which was detected using
>> other tool which is not using wikidata.
> Could you point me to that tool?

  It is a local Lithuanian tool. But here you can have a look at results:
  http://patrulis.openmap.lt/wikipedia.html

> That's exactly my point. I mean, that's why I think it's a good idea to
> automate the process as much as possible. Even in cases requiring human
> attention it is possible to make it easier if a QA tool gives links needed
> to decide what is correct.

  And I'm showing you examples of exactly the opposite. Most of the
errors found need fixer to READ, LOOK around and make DECISION. Even
with those "simple" ones as missing wikipedia link on a school object
needs reading, because there could be a wikipedia article about some
former school which currently is something else.
  As far as I know wikipedia has no way to specify object as
"historic" - which does not belong to OSM.

>>   It's not only names, but codes and some other details. Wikipedia
>> page content is probably mixed or swaped (haven't done analysis yet).
> That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia and one may assume in good
> faith that when it's solved, everything about hillfort I will be in article
> about hillfort I and analogically for hillfort II. And hillfort I will be
> the one marked as such on the ground, as it is easier to fix Wikipedia, than
> go and change information on tables in front of the object. So, I would go
> and linked hillfort I in OSM with hillfort I in Wikipedia and waited until
> Wikipedia guys fix in Wikipedia, what needs to be fixed. In fact, I have
> done so, but then I thought again and reverted it. It's your decision.

  I claim it is better if the person who knows about such stuff is
doing the changes. Not somebody applying auto-guesswork and hoping
somebody else to finish (to do actual work, and usually do MORE work).

> How were the people asked? I can only see very short note in Lithuanian. I
> can' understand it, but it doesn't seem like "do not touch" request...

  Have you noticed the title of this thread? ;-)

> My advice would be to put some note in English. If you really think it's
> needed - see above.

  It looks ridiculous that we now have to put up signs all around to
avoid guessfixers... It is much simpler to just revert and be done
with it.

> You can also opt out from my script now by just adding "nowikidata=yes".

  Would it be enough to put nowikidata=yes, noautoupdates=yes,
noguesswork=yes on the node for Lithuania as a country? ;-)

> And now, think: how the existence of wikidata-based QA tool would stop
> wikipedia-based tool from detecting the error?

  It will not stop it. Wikidata based tool is also a very good idea. I
have no doubt we will be using it as well.

  But its current implementation is unacceptable to us. We want people
to know and think, not to be dumb commiters of auto-calculated
guesswork. So removing wikidata is currently the only way to avoid
such unwanted fix-hikers. And note, we're not mass-removing wikidata
tags, only on objects which attract attention by this
wikidata-"fixer".

  And again. If you guys were asked a number of times during previous
years to STOP doing updates at least in Lithuania (and also in other
countries), what is a point of continuing doing that? You're not
helping.

-- 
Tomas

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/10/2017 11:40, Ryszard Mikke wrote:

That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia


Part of the problem is that some of these problems simply aren't fixable 
at wikipedia.  For example 
https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0 and 
https://sq.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbia are allegedly the same article and 
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q403 lists them both. However, as can be 
seen by looking at the maps on each page, they aren't the same 
geographic entity - one includes Kosovo, one does not.  Neither is 
"wrong" from the point of view of the authors of each page yet they 
can't both be "correct" at the same time.


Best Regards,
Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Robert Banick]

HOT will probably never find a formulation of our mission and tools that
satisfies the entire OSM community. However, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t
try.

My two cents: How about a simple blurb describing and linking to OSM on the
About page? And perhaps the title banner could be rephrased to
“Collaborative Mapping of OpenStreetMap”?

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:28 PM Blake Girardot HOT/OSM <
blake.girar...@hotosm.org> wrote:

> Hi Christoph,
>
> We can not win if we do or if we do not :)
>
> It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked to
> change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
> misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
> Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.
>
> And the major emphasis on "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" is
> exactly because people also said we did not put OpenStreetMap
> prominently enough. Now it is the biggest thing on the page and that
> is not right either :)
>
> It doesn't say "HOT Collaborative Mapping" because people are not HOT
> mapping, they are OSM mapping.
>
> But, I think we are happy to change that title on that page to
> something else if the community feels it is somehow misrepresenting
> something.
>
> Respectfully,
> blake
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> >
> > I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
> > (http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
> > tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
> > no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
> > project with no official character.  At the same time it seems (at a
> > first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
> > To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the
> > impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
> > Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
> >
> > In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not
> > covered by the trademark policy we now have.
> >
> > --
> > Christoph Hormann
> > http://www.imagico.de/
> >
> > ___
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
>
> --
> 
> Blake Girardot
> Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Ryszard Mikke]

On 23 October 2017 at 07:17, Tomas Straupis  wrote:

> 2017-10-22 23:20 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> > So, to sum up:
> > 1) There was a link to disambiguation page that no one has corrected
> until
> > it was detected by Yuri's tool.
>
>   There was a link to disambiguation page which was detected using
> other tool which is not using wikidata.


Could you point me to that tool?


> That other tool gives more
> than 2500(!) items to fix in osm/wikipedia (Lithuania only). So there
> is enough work to be done until this particular problem is fixed. It
> could take two weeks, it could also take two years.
>

That's exactly my point. I mean, that's why I think it's a good idea to
automate the process as much as possible. Even in cases requiring human
attention it is possible to make it easier if a QA tool gives links needed
to decide what is correct.


> > 2) User kartonage has wrongly linked "Žagarės I piliakalnis" to "Žagarės
> II
> > piliakalnis" in Wikipedia.
> > 3) You have reverted it back to disambiguation link and no wikidata=* tag
> > even though there is an established ground truth in the form of big
> > information tables in front of each of those hillforts with names
> "Žagarės
> > piliakalnis I" and "Žagarės piliakalnis II" in big letters.
>
>   It's not only names, but codes and some other details. Wikipedia
> page content is probably mixed or swaped (haven't done analysis yet).
>

That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia and one may assume in good
faith that when it's solved, everything about hillfort I will be in article
about hillfort I and analogically for hillfort II. And hillfort I will be
the one marked as such on the ground, as it is easier to fix Wikipedia,
than go and change information on tables in front of the object. So, I
would go and linked hillfort I in OSM with hillfort I in Wikipedia and
waited until Wikipedia guys fix in Wikipedia, what needs to be fixed. In
fact, I have done so, but then I thought again and reverted it. It's your
decision.


>   And people were asked NOT to do automatic changes without local
> knowledge.
>

How were the people asked? I can only see very short note in Lithuanian. I
can' understand it, but it doesn't seem like "do not touch" request...

My advice would be to put some note in English. If you really think it's
needed - see above.

You can also opt out from my script now by just adding "nowikidata=yes".

> Yet you think that wikidata=* tag is the problem here?
>
>   It would not have been a problem if Yuri would not have created a
> tool which attracts people and fools them into believing such things
> could be fixed automatically.
>

I still think that correct linking to wikipedia is a good idea in this
case. For the reasons above.

  I can give another real world example where wikidata usage WOULD be a
> problem:
>
>   Say we have a church named "St. Brewers church". It has an object in
> OSM with corresponding name tag, a link to wikipedia page "St. Brewers
> church" and wikidata ref 12345.
>
>   Now this church is upgraded to basilica: it's name (in the real
> world) changes to "St. Brewers basilica".
>
>   OSMers do not notice this change (name tag is not changed),
> wikipedians do (wikipedia page title is renamed, leaving old 'church'
> page as a redirect only).
>
>   If we use QA tool based on wikipedia link, it finds that "St.
> Brewers church" does not exist anymore (redirect pages do not get into
> geotagged dumps). As soon as I try going to that page I'm redirected
> to "...basilica" page. Now I know that a name has changed and I change
> it in name and name:xx tags in OSM.
>
>   If we use QA tool based on wikidata, it will find NOTHING wrong
> here. wikidata 12345 will be pointing to "St. Brewers basilica" page.
> Nothing wrong. No noticing of a change of name. Which leaves OSM with
> outdated name and no way to notice (names in wikipedia and OSM do not
> always match, comparing wikidata and OSM name is not always possible,
> we need to find the fact of CHANGE of wikipedia article name).
>

On the contrary, AFAIK redirection pages don't have wikidata item, so the
wikidata-based tool would detect them. It is even possible to automatically
detect such cases (i.e. Wikidata article's title has changed, and there is
a redirect under old title) and correct wikipedia link in OSM to the new
title in Wikipedia. It would leave the name, but hey, it's easier to detect
name change manually if there is an obvious difference between name=* and
wikipedia=* tags, than to compare wikipedia=* tag with the current
Wikipedia article.

BTW such automatic correction is also possible even if the redirect would
have it's own wikidata item, or if there is no redirection at all.

And now, think: how the existence of wikidata-based QA tool would stop
wikipedia-based tool from detecting the error?
-- 
--
http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/
r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com

دراجة أكبر
___

Re: [OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Blake Girardot HOT/OSM]

Hi Christoph,

We can not win if we do or if we do not :)

It clearly says the HOT Tasking Manager, which it is. We were asked to
change it from OSM Tasking Manager because people felt that was
misrepresenting, it was not the OSM Tasking manager, it was HOT's
Tasking Manager, so I changed that in TM v2.

And the major emphasis on "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" is
exactly because people also said we did not put OpenStreetMap
prominently enough. Now it is the biggest thing on the page and that
is not right either :)

It doesn't say "HOT Collaborative Mapping" because people are not HOT
mapping, they are OSM mapping.

But, I think we are happy to change that title on that page to
something else if the community feels it is somehow misrepresenting
something.

Respectfully,
blake


On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
>
> I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page
> (http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself
> tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with
> no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate
> project with no official character.  At the same time it seems (at a
> first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.
> To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the
> impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap
> Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.
>
> In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not
> covered by the trademark policy we now have.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



-- 

Blake Girardot
Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Misrepresentation of OSM by HOT?

[Christoph Hormann]

I recently turned up on the HOT tasking manager page 
(http://tasks.hotosm.org/) and found the page is now presenting itself 
tautologically as an "OpenStreetMap Collaborative Mapping" portal with 
no indication except for the small logo on top that this is a separate 
project with no official character.  At the same time it seems (at a 
first glance) there is not a single link on the site to OpenStreetMap.  
To the visitor unfamiliar with OSM this is quite likely to generate the 
impression that this is OSM and that contributing to "OpenStreetMap 
Collaborative Mapping" always happens via HOT tasks.

In my eyes this is a fairly clear misrepresentation of OpenStreetMap not 
covered by the trademark policy we now have.

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

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk