@mmd,
I have noticed that the proposed fixes were not marked with vote=1. I fixed
them.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quick_fixes#Proposed_fixes
I'm not sure if vote=1 is needed for the multiple-choice challenges. They
were originally copied from the officially deprecated tags, so technical
>mostly personal attack [2],
The following is not a personal attack its a last ditch effort to get you
to think before acting or posting. I may use terms you are not familiar
with urbandictionary.com is a good source for explanations.
You seem to take any comment by anyone who does not wholehear
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 6:02 PM, Michael Reichert
wrote:
> Hi Yuri,
>
> Am 13.11.2017 um 22:58 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan:
> > Andy, I can only assume you agree with the rest of my argument. As for
> this
> > case -- this is not a mechanical edit. Per definition. I looked at each
> of
> > these three
Frederik, once again you are using your position and mailing list as a
tribune, speaking to others instead of speaking to me. I posted [1] my
initial idea/tool, and you immediately wrote a large, mostly personal
attack [2], rather than something like [3] - which also criticized, but
helped guide i
Hi all,
Lurking, but first time posting. I was trying to just ignore this
thread, but at this point, I had to add my 2c... My story: I am rather
new to OSM community (although I joined in 2009[1], probably before most
of you reading this:), came here (again) recently, full of optimism to
improve wo
While it is easy to throw tons of accusations and be less civil, I will try
maintain my level of decency. I have forwarded you a snippet of one of the
emails I received (without the sender name). Also, you are welcome to
organize some independent person you trust in NYC to stop by and examine it
i
Hi,
On 11/13/2017 10:58 PM, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> Andy, I can only assume you agree with the rest of my argument.
Yuri, I think at this point it is time for me to stop reading your
contributions here. You are not genuinely trying to understand; this is
just a smoke-screen. You are trying to wi
On 13/11/2017 22:31, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
... Maybe I should write up an FAQ with all the arguments raised
here, and simply refer to them? It would save on typing.
No, maybe you should just listen and act on the feedback that you're
getting here. There have been an awful lot of replies in t
@mmd, thanks, inline:
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 5:32 PM, mmd wrote:
> > * Added voting - experimental tasks require two users agreement to
> change DB
>
> I assumed this to be a mandatory part of the new process. However, some
> recent edits made by a "Serbian OSM Lint bot" [1] via your tool
> ind
Hi Yuri,
Am 13.11.2017 um 22:58 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan:
> Andy, I can only assume you agree with the rest of my argument. As for this
> case -- this is not a mechanical edit. Per definition. I looked at each of
> these three features, analyzed them, and thought this is a reasonable
> change. You c
Thanks Christoph, I love #386 too. As I repeatedly stated - my goal is to
allow simpler way for community to fix issues, which in turn would lower
data consumer entry barrier. Not prove someone incorrect (despite the
appearance). Several specific issues and suggestions were raised in this
thread,
Am 07.11.2017 um 07:29 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan:
> The tool has been thoroughly reworked, thanks to many good suggestions.
> Please keep discussion to constructive suggestions and ideas - they help
> us all move forward and reach agreement.
>
> What's new:
> * Added "reject" vote button
> * Tasks ca
Hi Yuri,
Am 13.11.2017 um 13:20 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan:
> Christoph, I don't think this works for any community that grows beyond a
> certain size, especially when the community is not in the same
> location/building/land otherwise, and doesn't see each other every day.
> Look at Wikipedia, or any
On Monday 13 November 2017, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> Andy, I can only assume you agree with the rest of my argument. [...]
If you have made this assumption about anyone who you have communicated
with in the OSM community in the past you would be well advised to stop
that and review the views you
Hi,
On 11/13/2017 08:52 PM, Andy Townsend wrote:
> At the risk of repeating something that's been said multiple times
> previously, with JOSM autofixes you're performing edits in an area where
> you've already edited. You're presumably somewhat familiar with what's
> there
I'll also repeat somet
Andy, I can only assume you agree with the rest of my argument. As for this
case -- this is not a mechanical edit. Per definition. I looked at each of
these three features, analyzed them, and thought this is a reasonable
change. You could call it a mistake (I am human), but it cannot be called
mech
On 13/11/2017 21:19, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
Andy, as I stated before, JOSM doesn't force you to edit in your area
- it shows you whatever data you download. OverpassT can provide it to
JOSM anywhere too. Your query in Sophox can be limited to an area, or
can be anywhere - it all depends on the
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 13/11/2017 19:36, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
> > That's why I think Sophox is a much better and safer alternative to
> JOSM's autofixes.
>
> At the risk of repeating something that's been said multiple times
> previously, with JOSM autofixes
I posted a topic on this matter in OpenStreetMap Forum>Editors on the very same
day as this thread was started, by coincidence, and directed to this mailing
list by SomeoneElse. I received helpful replies and believe I have succeeded
in overcoming the slow responses we were experiencing as a re
On 13/11/2017 19:36, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> That's why I think Sophox is a much better and safer alternative to
JOSM's autofixes.
At the risk of repeating something that's been said multiple times
previously, with JOSM autofixes you're performing edits in an area where
you've already edited
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Rory McCann wrote:
> On 13/11/17 01:16, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
>> if an accepted tool already does something in a certain way, and noone is
>> raising any objections to it, I think other software should follow in the
>> same foot steps.
>>
> > ...
>
>> I haven't
On 13/11/17 01:16, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
if an accepted tool already does something in a certain way, and
noone is raising any objections to it, I think other software should
follow in the same foot steps.
> ...
I haven't heard anyone saying that JOSM validator autofixes do a bad
thing until t
Hi,
On 11/13/17 13:04, Christoph Hormann wrote:
> On Monday 13 November 2017, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>> Christoph, thanks for clarifying. I should have been a bit more
>> careful with that word. Could you clarify one thing - if wiki is not
>> authoritative for deprecation, than what is? "Communi
Christoph, I don't think this works for any community that grows beyond a
certain size, especially when the community is not in the same
location/building/land otherwise, and doesn't see each other every day.
Look at Wikipedia, or any large social organization for that matter. At the
village/startu
On Monday 13 November 2017, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> Christoph, thanks for clarifying. I should have been a bit more
> careful with that word. Could you clarify one thing - if wiki is not
> authoritative for deprecation, than what is? "Community consensus
> that something is not to be used" has t
Christoph, thanks for clarifying. I should have been a bit more careful
with that word. Could you clarify one thing - if wiki is not authoritative
for deprecation, than what is? "Community consensus that something is not
to be used" has to be documented somewhere, right?
Per https://wiki.openst
On Monday 13 November 2017, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
>
> The wiki deprecation only lists one =no: highway=no, but we are not
> discussing that one yet --
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Deprecated_features
>
> I used the word "deprecated" in a more general term, to mean anything
> that communit
I only think I will print Frederick's mails, and regularly read them
again and again.
Deprecated implies «bad, should not exist in OSM database, no one
reviewed this object for the last years». It has very strong
implications in OSM vocabulary. Using it here would have the effect to
readers «Ye
JB, try to avoid swearword outburst, not helpful. Are you taking issue
with the word "deprecated"? The proper word should probably have been
"unnecessary" to discuss the layer=0, per JOSM's naming:
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/browser/josm/trunk/data/validator/unnecessary.mapcss
The wiki depre
Le 13/11/2017 à 01:16, Yuri Astrakhan a écrit :
You are right that =0 and =no seem like nobrainers, but if we have
listed them as deprecated, we should not use them.
Deprecated? Where did you find that?
(Swearwords somewhere here. Did someone already said that you mix issues?)
30 matches
Mail list logo
