On 26.09.2012 10:13, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> I'm not sure where you read the extra requirement for "discussion" or
> "bureaucracy" in what I wrote. Could you clarify?

Discussion and bureaucracy requirements exist for automated/mechanical
edits according to the policy pages you would like to see "combined into
one" with with this guideline. Thus your attempted definition of
"automated edits" seems quite relevant.

Also, your proposed text includes the requirement to create and link to
a documentation page, which imo qualifies as "bureaucracy":

> bot_url=<link to a page describing the automated edit>

>> But I read it so. Also selecting 10 buildings in JOSM and 
>> pressing Q would fall below your proposal (automated 
>> geometry fixup) and require me to add these extra tags.
> 
> That qualifies as "manual drawing actions" rather than "automated". I was
> seeking to address things like xybot's bulk geometry corrections. But if you
> have a suggestion for better wording, I'm all ears. :)

If you want to address changes performed by scripts/bots, then why don't
you just say so explicitly and avoid any potential misunderstandings?

==

An 'automated edit' is one where the editing is not carried out by
manual drawing actions. This includes (but is not limited to):

- imports of external data without inspection of individual objects
- any changes performed by a script/bot

==

Of course there are special cases where e.g. a powerful editor is used
to blindly do the exact same thing a script would do, but things like
these are what the "not limited to" is for.

As for reverts, I wouldn't mention them here at all. There should be
guidelines for them, yes, but they should be looked at separately. Some
of the concepts related to reverts (such as contacting the original
changeset's author personally first, or even dealing with explicit
revert requests by said author) don't really exist elsewhere.

Tobias

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Reply via email to