Andy, I idea that "lets not fix things as it might be better to resurvey by hand" for rejecting it is not any part of DWG policy or standards. You should stop pretending like it is.
It seems like you want to appease the people those they think there area is mapped and need prompting to do any mapping. Notes answer is a cop out answer. It fixes nothing of things that can actually be fixed. We all know that a resurvey every few months of an average high street, etc is likely going to show changes. If these people want something to do and cannot think for themselves then I can write a bot that will place a note say "Please resurvey" every if nothing has changed in retail area greater then x in y months. Also the "it seems to me like it is pointless" is no reason again for DWG to reject this. There are many things I could think are pointless that I do not map and I am sure vice versa . If someone wants to map waste paper bins, benches, car park lanes, disabled access, grass verges on traffic islands, etc you should not stop nor discourage them. If someone want to *fix* waste paper bins, benches, car park lanes, disabled access, grass verges on traffic islands, etc you should not stop nor discourage them. Also the reason "lets not do the mech edit because not all the info of that type is in the database" is *not* reason for DWG to reject it. Let's me explain how this helps. If say the mapping as shop name is in taginfo 33% A, 33% B, 33% C then what do we name it. Each of us on a whim name it as we want or maybe have a more consistent name. What is more useful? dozens of names or just 1 or 2? We all know it is the same shop. I would be happy, and I imagine most be, would be to get an indication of how best to map it. Style and constancy is something we as a community should at least consider. Rather than reject outright. There seem to be too much hippie commune attitude of free love and free tagging here. It might work in small communities but when you have bigger projects like this is now we need more co-ordination. We do x in my patch, y in my patch, z in my patch. Again really how does that help anyone? People only care about there only little bit of the map. You travel 20 miles away and all the standards can be so different? I was actually hoping you were going to give ideas of how the mechanical edit could go ahead when you had suggestions alas not. In the spirit of freedom of information what mechanical edit would you are DWG in general actually approve? What have you approved? I know a fair bit about the data now and understand the station issues, etc. For people I know know computers I am surprised how little you want to use them to fix data issues. I have said before about data issues. Post processing is needed in many things but *first* if possible you should fix the data. That is all, as you know, we are trying to do here. (I often in situations you were talking I imagine it was not possible to fix the data here it is.) I can quote examples til the cows come home about the bad data in the database. Data that is came across it in you local patch you would fix without question. The real issue is some vocal people here don't want anyone editing in their area - at all. Period. They are so self indulgent they think that the project is not a community project at all it is *theirs*. Low and behold any sort of community consensus about how the rest of the world/country does things. They will just do it their way and ignore everyone else. They seem jealous of others actually mapping stuff. Oh as for "OSM dinosaurs" I see equally derogatory name-calling remarks all the time from the same OSMers, lets take "wikifiddlers", "armchair mappers", etc. Hell there is even that official looking graphic that some of you have adopted on your userpages. And you can do plenty from behind a computer keyboard, shops included. All you need a little skill and work. We can also talk about all this over the next pint. :-) Cheers, John -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/No-more-voting-on-mechanical-edits-tp5827513p5827786.html Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
