My 2p:
Leave it to [2].
A. since it is no effort
B. any problems created by the redaction should be noticeable by [2] whether it
was caused by the bot or *any other normal edit*
Apart from deletions, but then the gives mappers (including new mappers!)
something to (re)map via local knowledge or other ODBL compatible sources - if
they are so inclined to notice something is missing.
I sort of like the idea of creating out of band info in OpenStreetBugs for
items that are deleted - i.e. just 'something was here' not sure how that can
be legal since that itself is a derivative of a decliners IP.
Be Seeing You - Rob.
If at first you don't succeed,
then skydiving isn't for you.
> Any help in identifying areas that should be eye-balled and possibly
> cleaned up would be welcome help indeed. It seems a small bit to attach
> a tag to any affected ways or relations from which members have been
> redacted. This will be especially helpful when the editing tools catch
> up to show the tags presence and/or highlight what could use attention.
>
> Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ
>
> On 4/12/2012 5:01 AM, Pieren wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The rebuild team is warning that the relicensing ("redaction" script)
> > will unsurprisingly affect many objects geometry like ways loosing
> > nodes, intersections with unconnected ways, self-intersecting
> > polygons, roundabouts not round, buildings not square anymore, etc..
> > ([1]).
> > The question is to insert in the rebuild script some kind of reports
> > or logs about such affected objects or not. First, I think it has to
> > be discussed widely with the community, not only in a small group (we
> > have enough conspiracy noises in this project).
> > Then, I think that the best option would be to add a specific tag
> > which could facilitate the remapping process for the "crowd". The tag
> > should be enough self-explanatory for all, including newcomers and
> > removed once the issue is fixed.
> > Another option is to set-up some monitoring of the affected objects
> > and consider them as 'fixed' as soon as they are touched after the
> > relicensing (but that could be insufficient imho).
> > Last option is to do nothing since we already have many quality
> > assurance tools ([2]) monitoring the contributions.
> >
> > Pieren
> >
> >
> > [1] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/rebuild/2012-April/000199.html
> > [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quality_Assurance
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > talk@openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
