Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)
>it was one person in CA adding 400 unverified tags to rail service in chicago. > >one just 818 m, away from my home. > >>Saturday, August 22, 2020 12:32 PM -05:00 from Martin Koppenhoefer < >>dieterdre...@gmail.com >: >> >>sent from a phone >> >>> On 22. Aug 2020, at 10:15, pangoSE < pang...@riseup.net > wrote: >>> >>> Here is yet another example of bad data in our database: >>fix it ;-) >> >>Of course OpenStreetMap contains errors, just like any other source, and >>probably more, given that most contributors are laymen and have very few >>experience (few total edits, often just 1). >> >>On the other hand, we may be very fast when something changes, very flexible >>in emergencies (think Haiti), and have interesting niche data that commercial >>and public data providers don’t care for. >> >>It all depends on the local community in the end. If you have reached a >>critical mass to have locals everywhere, it will work great and bugs will >>wash out. Otherwise the data might get stale just like any other data. Also >>using the data is essential to find the problems, for example the 212 story >>garage is likely fixed now ;-) >> >>I tend to agree with Steve A. >> >>Cheers Martin >>___ >>talk mailing list >>t...@openstreetmap.org >>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] [OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)
"It a playground with half-ass quality more than an authoritative and verified source of information (like e.g. Wikipedia)" I am not sure whatever you claim that Wikipedia is "playground with half-ass quality" or "authoritative and verified source of information". Though any of this claims would demonstrate that you are wrong and uninformed. Like with your "deprecate name tag" there are so many wrong things here. OSM would benefit from better verification tools and so on but insult-laden post filed with misunderstandings will not lead towards them. 22 Aug 2020, 09:32 by pang...@riseup.net: > Hi > > 80hnhtv4agou--- via talk skrev: (22 augusti 2020 > 03:06:37 CEST) > > > > >Also there is no wiki on unverified edits. > > > > In OSM we don't yet have an established system for verification or accurate > machine readable references for the data to my knowledge. > > This means the whole database is basically just a mess of biased data that > one of our millions of editors thought should be included. Most objects have > very few revisions and we have no idea about the overall quality or > correctness. It a playground with half-ass quality more than an authoritative > and verified source of information (like e.g. Wikipedia). Building upon it > can lead to strange things. E.g. > https://www.nyteknik.se/popularteknik/mystisk-jatteskrapa-dok-upp-i-flygsimulator-6999771 > (building:levels=212 was entered erroneously and committed to the database > without any kind of QA follow-up. If someone knows the osmid I would like to > know how long this error was present in OSM) > > We should really fix this and start a verification effort after implementing > a sane verification model. > > ___ > talk mailing list > t...@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
