On jeudi 20 septembre 2012, Lester Caine wrote: > sly (sylvain letuffe) wrote: > >> The 'mechanisms' that we use MUST be managed centrally, > > What are you talking about ? What "mechanisms" are you refering to ? > > Simply the methods by which data is added to the database. There are several methods in play to make data includes in the database, and not only I think we don't "MUST" but we can't, that's pure utopia. My moving mouse clicing in JOSM is part of my method to enter data in the database, do you wish to manage my moving mouse centrally ?
Sorry to play dumb, but if we want to discuss "mechanisms" in one and only rule : that won't work, so let's return to the one special class of mechanisms I was refering to : "semi-manual imports, done with JOSM by one contributor, on a smaller scale than a country for wish the community of that country has described guidelines and has allowed not to use a dedicated account" > And all I am trying to understand now is why if we HAVE digital data to work > with for which further versions will be provided over the coming decades > someone > has to manually check every line every year or so? I think this is off topic, even if related, but I'll be glad to explain for the case I know if you wish. Although, it was partially explained for the special case of the french import in the thread "Import guidelines & OSMF/DWG governance" for wich that question is also off topic. You can start a new topic like "why are french importing from cadastre if every line as to me checked every year" or more general for any import like : "why are people importing data from other sources" and I'll be glad to answer No, I'm not asking you to go away because you are bothering me, it just looks like you want more informations on what we do and why we do it with our french cadastre. But since this thread is allready a bit confused, I'll try to keep it focused on : "Import guidelines proposal update" > This data was in the > database, so only the changes needed to be posted, but a mistake was made. > We learn from mistakes and so what I am trying to learn is if we could have > HELPED by reducing the chance of the mistake? By providing tools that take > advantage of the data and process it in a way that it is more useful ... in > a format that is compatible with later importing to OSM. Every thing can be improved right ? To stay in topic, my point is that letting the local community have some final decision, and possibility to contact in his language, the owner of the offending changeset, not only will the error be better understood by the community, but the author is also less likely to close the OSM dors with frustration. Like it might well happen with this user after beeing blocked : http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dd40cestmoi He went on our forum to present himself, to talk, to say he will ask questions, then was sent an english email and then blocked by pnorman and that guy never appeared again even to ask us why he couldn't edit. (maybe it's only temporary, but that guy let a terrible mess behing that he couldn't correct because he was blocked) I'll be contacting him soon to try to keep him (are we not a community ?) and aked him if he could clean the mess, or understand why it led to that mess. (For the rest, this is slightly off topic here imho, and this more a matter of how technically improve imports, and I guess the dev list is best suited) -- sly qui suis-je : http://sly.letuffe.org email perso : sylvain chez letuffe un point org _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
