On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Jochen Topf <joc...@remote.org> wrote:
> Only manually detected problems should be tagged with fixme. And it should be > as easy as possible to mark those. Extra categorization would make it more > difficult. I don't think it makes it significantly more difficult, as fixmes should have some kind of description of the problem. Classifiying them in the tags is just a more systematic way of doing that, which makes them more amenable to higher-level tool use (e.g. someone could write a program that identifies the areas with most density of problems that need on-the-ground surveying... or even a route planner that creates a route using highways tagged as approximate, for someone to carry a GPS over, although the latter is probably stretching it a bit). > Why exactly do you want the extra categorization? What help would it > be in your practical day to day work? It's not just ease of tagging things with fixme that counts (although it should be easy, and a plain "fixme" should always be acceptable); ease of using (finding and fixing) the fixmes is also important. > I can see one useful differentiation: Some problems are fixable only with > local > knowledge (say a missing street name), some are fixable from afar (most > topological problems). It might be helpful to not see problems needing local > knowledge in areas where I don't have local knowledge. I think it's also helpful for people to be able to plan problem-fixing surveys efficiently. __John _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
