[Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 11:21 PM, François Lacombe < fl.infosrese...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > +1 with Bryce and "published" instead of "approved" > +1 with Ole regarding power features > > Cheers > François > So let's see if we can make it happen. The question of what wiki approval means

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

2015-04-03 10:22 GMT+01:00 Bryce Nesbitt : > On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 11:21 PM, François Lacombe > wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> +1 with Bryce and "published" instead of "approved" >> +1 with Ole regarding power features >> >> Cheers >> François > > > So let's see if we can make it happen. The questi

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

Will it be clear for new mappers what the difference is between published and documented (i.e. someone created a wiki page that describes a tag without voting or one that didn't collect enough votes)? Wouldn't endorsed be better? On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 11:30 AM Dan S wrote: > 2015-04-03 10:22 GM

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

One more idea: why do we need a binary outcome of the voting? Something like endorsement= positive/neutral/negative (the current approve, abstain, reject) as an indicator tells much more (together with tag use). Examples: - Endorsement=50/0/2 - very good, important tag (much involvement) - go

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

Don't like that idea... The 'voting' needs to be yes/no otherwise it is too much of a judgement call that will not make sense to most. If something is rejected.. then if someone cares enough they can simply make a wiki page .. just as if they had never had a vote on the feature. The true asse

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

-1 'Endorsed' is just another way of saying approved. We need to remove this status that 'some authority' has given their blessing to use the tag. 'Published' is a useful statement which demonstrates community discussion and some consensus but nothing else. -- Cheers, Chris user: chillly

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On 3/04/2015 10:12 PM, Chris Hill wrote: -1 'Endorsed' is just another way of saying approved. We need to remove this status that 'some authority' has given their blessing to use the tag. True. 'Published' is a useful statement which demonstrates community discussion and some consensus bu

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

I welcome this idea. Yves Le 3 avril 2015 13:09:07 GMT+02:00, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit : >Don't like that idea... The 'voting' needs to be yes/no otherwise it is > >too much of a judgement call that will not make sense to most. > >If something is rejected.. then if someone cares enou

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On 03.04.2015 11:22, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > The proposal on the table is to change the wiki status of "Approved" to > read "Published" I would prefer to stay with "approved". Using "published" would not actually make things clearer, quite the opposite: Using the normal meaning of "published", a pr

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

Is "supported" reasonable? On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 4:41 PM Tobias Knerr wrote: > On 03.04.2015 11:22, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > > The proposal on the table is to change the wiki status of "Approved" to > > read "Published" > > I would prefer to stay with "approved". Using "published" would not > act

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

“Supported” by whom? To me that implies that a number of data consumers/renders will use that data. I personally interpret a voted on wiki proposal as “recommended”. Tod > On Apr 3, 2015, at 7:49 AM, Jan van Bekkum wrote: > > Is "supported" reasonable? > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 4:41 PM Tobi

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

Hi, On 04/03/2015 05:01 PM, Tod Fitch wrote: > I personally interpret a voted on wiki proposal as “recommended”. Ideally, "recommended by 25 users", just to bring a perspective to things ;) But humour aside, I applaud the idea of getting rid of "approved". The suggestion of "published" is not id

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

I like recommended by 25 users, but then I would also want to know how many users oppose the idea: 25-0 is not the same as 25-24. On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 5:14 PM Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 04/03/2015 05:01 PM, Tod Fitch wrote: > > I personally interpret a voted on wiki proposal as “recomme

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On 3 April 2015 at 10:22, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > The proposal on the table is to change the wiki status of "Approved" to read > "Published", > with no other changes. The feeling is the term "published" is less likely > to cause new mappers to incorrectly weight the tagging conventions described >

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 8:12 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > On 04/03/2015 05:01 PM, Tod Fitch wrote: > > I personally interpret a voted on wiki proposal as “recommended”. > > Ideally, "recommended by 25 users", just to bring a perspective to things > ;) > But humour aside, I applaud the idea of gettin

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On 03/04/15 17:09, Matthijs Melissen wrote: I appreciate your effort to bring more clarity in the different wiki statuses. However, I don't think changing the status 'Approved' to 'Published' is a good idea. In my opinion, 'approved' is exactly what it is: a proposal approved by the OSM communi

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

Hi, On 04/03/2015 06:09 PM, Matthijs Melissen wrote: > However, I don't think changing the status 'Approved' to 'Published' > is a good idea. In my opinion, 'approved' is exactly what it is: a > proposal approved by the OSM community. No, approved is often misunderstood as "approved by the OSM co

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

No, that is not sensible - it's a bit like the Hitchhiker's guide "you > could have read this if you had wanted to" thing. Except that we don't have a "Beware of the Leopard" sign. Maybe we should start a vote on how to tag those. Polyglot ___ Taggin

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

Circling back to the proposal at hand: The notion is that the word "approved" has over the years repeatedly contributed to confusion about the role of a wiki vote. The proposal is to replace the word "approved" with the word "published". -- Separately we can talk about how to involve more people

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On 4/04/2015 8:30 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: Circling back to the proposal at hand: The notion is that the word "approved" has over the years repeatedly contributed to confusion about the role of a wiki vote. The proposal is to replace the word "approved" with the word "published". Against. I

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Against. I don't think the word change will change that confusion. > Is that "abstain because it's a waste of time", or "opposed because it will cause harm"? ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

Actually we can also rid of “Rejected” in the same way. I have seen example of (but cannot remember exactly what tag) of a “rejected” tag with many usages. I rather change “Rejected” to “Not Recommended”, and with that kind of wording, “Approved” would rather be “Recommended (by 25 users)”. A w

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

You're right, the 'status' field in the template may look very official and definitive, but going from approved to published is a step in a good direction. Yves Le 3 avril 2015 23:50:40 GMT+02:00, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> a écrit : >On 4/04/2015 8:30 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: >> Circling back

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On 4/04/2015 8:58 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: Against. I don't think the word change will change that confusion. Is that "abstain because it's a waste of time", or "opposed because it will ca

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On 04/04/2015, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/04/2015 8:58 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > > It is a 'No' vote. Not an abstain. > > . > For an English definition see > http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/154075?redirectedFrom=published#eid That's behind a paywall. Wou

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 3:23 AM, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: > One can try to write a page defining what "published" means in the > context of wiki proposals. But given the current level of controversy, > I wish the authors good luck :p This mailing list community veers toward nit picking and bike

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On 5/04/2015 8:12 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 3:23 AM, moltonel 3x Combo > wrote: One can try to write a page defining what "published" means in the context of wiki proposals. But given the current level of controversy, I wish the author

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

Honestly, this "approved" v. something else is a storm in a tea cup. The proposals have been (or not) approved. Yes, by a small minority of OSM mappers but ones who have thought about the proposal and they are not in any way an exclusive group. It does not say compulsory, required or anything pre

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 5/04/2015 8:12 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > > This mailing list community veers toward nit picking and bike shedding, > and tends to block rather than guide forward change. It's also a tiny > fraction of the mapping communi

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On 5/04/2015 4:16 PM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > wrote: On 5/04/2015 8:12 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: This mailing list community veers toward nit picking and bike shedding, and tends to block rathe

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

W dniu 05.04.2015 8:16, Bryce Nesbitt napisał(a): So come up with a better word. Let's find common ground to improve the wiki's role in the project. The misunderstanding in the role of the wiki vote has been persistent, harmful, and long standing. In my opinion this is the key problem - it's

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

Hi, On 04/05/2015 08:16 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > The misunderstanding in the role of the wiki vote has been persistent, > harmful, and long standing. Yes. Together with the concept of "deprecated" by the way; and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Deprecated_features which for similar reasons

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

2015-04-05 7:16 GMT+01:00 Bryce Nesbitt : > On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On 5/04/2015 8:12 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: >> >> This mailing list community veers toward nit picking and bike shedding, >> and tends to block rather than guide forward change. It

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On 05.04.2015 19:01, Dan S wrote: It's such a chuffing tiny innocent suggestion, and it's thoroughly bikeshedded into the ground! As always, voices againt may sounds louder, howeverI have the feeling that changing 'approved' to 'recommended' or 'published' is doable. Yves

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

On 05/04/2015, Frederik Ramm wrote: > I really see two paths - either continue what I did, let the Wiki use > terms like "approved" but make it clear enough to everyone that the Wiki > isn't the OSM bible but just what a very small number of people think > about OSM; or try to increase the standin

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

2015-04-05 0:12 GMT+02:00 Bryce Nesbitt : > > This mailing list community veers toward nit picking and bike shedding, > and tends to block rather than guide forward change. It's also a tiny > fraction of the mapping community, which is sad. > > > *"Published" *in this sense m

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

In my opinion changing the word doesn't get rid of the problem. Especially if the "word" - no matter if it is published, approved, whatever - is the result of another glorious vote. There should be no "vote" at the end of any discussion, because the discussion never ends! Especially there should be

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

+1, Totally agree with this. I think I also mentioned the "be in proposal for an extended period" before. Give a tagging scheme the time to mature, new variations/needs might pop up only after a couple of months. regards m On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Martin Vonwald wrote: > In my opinion c

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

2015-04-07 13:00 GMT+02:00 Martin Vonwald : > Especially there should be no "vote" before the tag is used on a wide base > and proves itself! If different mappers use the same tag for different purposes we got a real problem, because you won't be able to tell what a tag on a given object is mea

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

Don't mistake "voting" with "documenting". And btw: neither the one nor the other prevents any mapper of misusing any tag. 2015-04-07 13:30 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer : > > 2015-04-07 13:00 GMT+02:00 Martin Vonwald : > >> Especially there should be no "vote" before the tag is used on a wide >>

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

2015-04-07 13:33 GMT+02:00 Martin Vonwald : > Don't mistake "voting" with "documenting". And btw: neither the one nor > the other prevents any mapper of misusing any tag. > > the difference is that someone who has a different idea of the definition of a proposal in draft or proposed status could

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

Here again comes the spirit of "approved", i.e. voted-on tags :-( If one wants to avoid conflicts, one will always use different tags than tags that are already in use. A proposal should be the documentation of new tags that are actually used(!). A proposal should not be a drawing board idea that

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

2015-04-07 13:50 GMT+02:00 Martin Vonwald : > > If one wants to avoid conflicts, one will always use different tags than > tags that are already in use. > +-0, typically mappers want to use the same tags that other users also use to make usage of the map data easier (i.e. they want their stuff r

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

2015-04-07 14:07 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer : > 2015-04-07 13:50 GMT+02:00 Martin Vonwald : > >> If one wants to avoid conflicts, one will always use different tags than >> tags that are already in use. >> > +-0, typically mappers want to use the same tags that other users also use > to make us

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Rename wiki status "Approved" to "Published"

2015-04-07 15:10 GMT+02:00 Martin Vonwald : > I was refering to "different idea of the defintion". > > If someone has a different idea about what a tag should mean, one will > either > * be ignorant and use the tag in a (completely) different way > the issue is typically not a "completely" diffe