I think the data we are collecting breaks down into two sorts:
1) where stuff is
2) what stuff is
The "where stuff is" is the hard part - it is done by trogging round with a
GPS (and deciphering the resulting track), memory from visiting, or (least
hard, but subject to systematic error) tracing fr
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 09:15:23 +0100, Peter Miller wrote:
> I suggest that this should be done at the level of a change-set, not
> at the feature level. There would a change-set patrol page/rss feed
> with an indication of which pages have been patrolled and by whom.
> Change-sets can either b
On 8 Aug 2009, at 11:11, Simon Ward wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 01:11:02PM +0100, Nick Barnes wrote:
>> To my mind, nobody ought to be able to edit live map data unless:
>>
>> 1 - They have uploaded n tracks,
>> 2 - They have had m edits approved by a moderator
>> 3 - They are vouched for by
On Sat, Aug 08, 2009 at 01:55:30PM +0100, OJ W wrote:
> > Instead, I’d like to see a way of saying someone has verified the data
> > without changing it.
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Checked_by
I’ve seen that proposal before, and it feels a little “icky”. The
comment
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Simon Ward wrote:
> It has already been said, but I think raising the barrier to
> contribution is the wrong way to go.
>
> Instead, I’d like to see a way of saying someone has verified the data
> without changing it.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_fea
On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 01:11:02PM +0100, Nick Barnes wrote:
> To my mind, nobody ought to be able to edit live map data unless:
>
> 1 - They have uploaded n tracks,
> 2 - They have had m edits approved by a moderator
> 3 - They are vouched for by somebody who has made many many edits
>
> (insert
6 matches
Mail list logo
