Hi,
Yann Coupin wrote:
> I completely agree with Pieren here. Unless you're part of the happy
> fews, if case of vandalism/error, you're forced to painstakingly
> repair by hand the problems
That is true, but we also have to look at the potential for problems.
("If everyone had a gun, it would be much easier for everyone to defend
themselves, and the streets would thus become much safer for everyone."
- Can you spot the problem?)
Often it is not one evil vandal against the poor mapper who repairs
things. It is something like this: User A thinks that all cycleways
should be highway=path,cycle=designated, and changes them all in his
village. User B dislikes the idea and reverts the change (along with a
small number of more usefule edits that A did and that were in the same
changeset). User A reverts the revert. User B becomes angry and reverts
not only the reversion of the revert, but all other edits that A did in
the last week. User A asks his friend C for help, and C reverts
everything that B ever did. B finds out that C is from Corse and deletes
the whole island... etc. etc.
If we make these things too easy, then they will get abused. While it is
true that the above scenario could happen today, it would require much
more effort on the part of all parties, and this is a certain hurdle.
I am all for for giving more power to everyone but we have to think
about how we can do this the right way.
Also, it is quite a challenge technically as well. A good revert system
would have to visualise what it is about to revert, and would have to
check in advance whether there are going to be any follow-on problems. A
good revert system could even alert the user whose change is about to be
reverted, and the user would have a chance to complain. It is surely
something that we must think about, and surely not a matter of simply
putting a button there that says "revert".
Bye
Frederik
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
