Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

Thank you. On Sat, 2017-10-07 at 10:55 +0200, Christoph Hormann wrote: > I would be careful interpreting the lack of objections to your > automated  > edits in the local community as universal approval though.  There > are  > likely also locals who do not think this is a good idea but due to >

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

Thanks, i think this is a constructive approach to automated edits and if everyone worked this way i don't think we would have a problem. In particular: * your bot is well documented * you discussed it with the local community * it has a good supervision to editing volume ratio * it runs only

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

Drudgery is evil, well written bots save us from drudgery, and allow us to use human time more productively, therefore well written bots are good. Why should a human clean up whitespace, or add the "cuisine" tag to a hundred "Burger King" branches? Shouldn't our creative brains invest their time

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

Speaking from my Wikipedia bot experience (I wrote bots and created Wikipedia API over 10 years ago to help bots): Bots were successful in Wikipedia because all users felt empowered. Users could very easily see what the bot edited, fix or undo bot edits, and easily communicate with the bot

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

True indeed. What this means, is that there can be a 'mismatch' between the Wikipedia tag and the Wikidata tag, if the Wikidata tag is more specific than what Wikipedia wants to create pages for. It's normal that this happens, as both projects have a different notion of notability. Aldi Nord and

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

2017-10-06 10:10 GMT+02:00 Jo : > What I don't understand is the problems people seem to have with wikidata. > If an existing wikidata entry doesn't align with what we mapped, then > create a new wikidata entry that does and link it to the existing entries. > it's actually

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

Or a bot=https://fancyurl.iou/lawyeredcontract.json to clearly define what the bot can and cannot do? Personally I think we need all the help we can get from automation, but it needs to remain 'overseen' by an actual mapper. That's why I like the todo list plugin in JOSM a lot. And why I try to

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

sent from a phone > On 6. Oct 2017, at 06:02, Yves wrote: > > @JB, I understood the bot=no tag like the add=no sticker on your physical > mailbox yes, just like every active mapper having tens of thousands of mailboxes to add stickers to. What about an opt in? Add a

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

On 06-Oct-17 02:37 PM, JB wrote: Le 05/10/2017 à 22:50, Yuri Astrakhan a écrit : I like the "bot=no" flag, or a more specific one for a given field -  "name:en:bot=no" - as long as those flags are not added by a bot :) Ho… We are now manually contributing one more tag to say it was

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

@JB, I understood the bot=no tag like the add=no sticker on your physical mailbox. Yves Le 6 octobre 2017 05:37:37 GMT+02:00, JB a écrit : > >Le 05/10/2017 à 22:50, Yuri Astrakhan a écrit : >> I like the "bot=no" flag, or a more specific one for a given field - > >>

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

Le 05/10/2017 à 22:50, Yuri Astrakhan a écrit : I like the "bot=no" flag, or a more specific one for a given field - "name:en:bot=no" - as long as those flags are not added by a bot :) Ho… We are now manually contributing one more tag to say it was contributed manually… So many people seem

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

I like the "bot=no" flag, or a more specific one for a given field - "name:en:bot=no" - as long as those flags are not added by a bot :) Would it make sense, judging how wikidata* tags have been mostly auto-added by iD, as well as user's bot efforts, including my own, to treat wikidata explicitly

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

On Tuesday 03 October 2017, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Did your proposal also extend to geoemtries? You said something about > bot:* tags, but if a bot were to orthogonalize an existing building, > would it then have to create a copy of that tagged > "bot:building=yes"? And how could that be

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

2017-10-03 2:25 GMT+02:00 Frederik Ramm : > > Did your proposal also extend to geoemtries? You said something about > bot:* tags, but if a bot were to orthogonalize an existing building, > would it then have to create a copy of that tagged "bot:building=yes"? > is

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

Hi, On 02.10.2017 18:50, Christoph Hormann wrote: > Of course i am certainly not representative for the typical mappers. I > would suspect there are probably mappers that would be attracted and > motivated by an OSM project where bots routinely 'fix' data > inconsistencies like typos in tags,

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

I would suggest simply adapting my old suggestion (for imports) that as long as you fix the same number of elements from a broken import you can bot edit/import to your hearts desire. Totally serious :-) Simon On 2. Oktober 2017 16:58:02 MESZ, Christoph Hormann wrote: >On

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

Actually, if you find the way to keep a db handling a property (or tag) of OSM element in sync with OSM, you have solved the need for UID. And if you happen to do so without UID or API change , it's very nice ! Le 2 octobre 2017 15:59:48 GMT+02:00, Christoph Hormann a écrit

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

Canada to continously see such negative messages about our work ;)  regard Pierre De : Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> À : talk@openstreetmap.org Envoyé le : lundi 2 octobre 2017 12h53 Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits On Monday 02 October 2017, Martijn van Exel wro

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

On Monday 02 October 2017, Martijn van Exel wrote: > I find this discussion and your proposal interesting to explore, at > least as a hypothetical. Do we know 1) what the volume of bot edits > is and how it has grown No, but i thought as well this would be an interesting thing to study. Of

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

t;m...@rtijn.org> À : Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> Cc : "talk@openstreetmap.org" <talk@openstreetmap.org> Envoyé le : lundi 2 octobre 2017 11h17 Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits I find this discussion and your proposal interesting to explore, at least as a

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

I find this discussion and your proposal interesting to explore, at least as a hypothetical. Do we know 1) what the volume of bot edits is and how it has grown 2) how many mappers have actually given up based upon this? My guess is that instead of coming up with a global solution, this could be

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

On 02/10/17 15:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Of course considering the big volume of editing activity that would > likely take place in the 'bot:' namespace in that scenario it might be > a good idea to put those tags into a separate database for efficiency > reasons. > > yes,

Re: [OSM-talk] A thought on bot edits

2017-10-02 15:59 GMT+02:00 Christoph Hormann : > > > > Of course considering the big volume of editing activity that would > likely take place in the 'bot:' namespace in that scenario it might be > a good idea to put those tags into a separate database for efficiency > reasons. >