Ryszard, I have disabled the fixing from the "embed" mode - you can still open the query (using "edit query"), click the "run" button (blue play button), and fix things from there.
In my spare time, I am still working on the next version, based on all the useful feedback: * It will be easy to find the changes made for a specific task, and review or revert them. * It will be possible to "vote" on a change for an experimental task. E.g., unless the task is marked as safe, two people will have to agree on a change before it happens, assuming there are no "no" votes. * It will be possible to have multiple choice tasks. * multiple changes for the same task can go into the same changeset * All votes will be stored in the same RDF database, making it possible to use vote information in tasks. I will write up a bit more about this project in a bit. I think there was a number of misconceptions about it, namely that it only relates to Wikidata, and that its a bot rather than a platform for the community to create and review tasks. On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Ryszard Mikke <ryszard.mi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Even without disabling - what a better tool fixes, JOSM's autofix won't > find... > > On 17 October 2017 at 09:50, Yuri Astrakhan <yuriastrak...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Well, you kind of can fix one with the other - by introducing a better >> tool and disabling some of the autofixes in JOSM (very easy to do). A more >> complex approach would clearly require a separate topic(s) and a >> substantial dev involvement. >> >> P.S. No, https://master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/ doesn't have any >> real data (it shows maps from live servers, but editing shows just a few >> objects). >> >> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:36 AM, Tobias Zwick <o...@westnordost.de> wrote: >> >>> I get your point, especially regarding the appliance of the JOSM >>> fix-button as a "by-the-way" fixing. >>> >>> Though, you can't fix possible issues with of one tool by introducing >>> another tool. People will not stop using (that feature of) JOSM. That is >>> why I think, if you think you detected a problematic issue there in that >>> editor, it should be discussed in a separate topic. >>> >>> On 17/10/2017 00:57, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: >>> > Michael, I can only judge by my own experience adding validation >>> autofix >>> > rules - I added a number of Wikipedia tag auto cleanups to JOSM, and >>> > they were reviewed by one or two JOSM developers and merged, probably >>> > because they were deemed benign. I don't know about the other rules, >>> > but I suspect many of them also went this route. Should have they been >>> > discussed more widely? I don't know, but that question is complicated, >>> > just like "what is a local community?" question. What a few devs may >>> see >>> > as benign, others may say needs a discussion, right? >>> > >>> > Mass editing is a different matter. We consider mass editing when one >>> > person goes out to fix something everywhere in the world. But when we >>> > provide a tool that automatically fixes something that you are looking >>> > at, we don't view it as such. Or at least we don't view it when it >>> > happens as part of JOSM, but we do when it happens in my new tool. Of >>> > course there is an important difference - JOSM doesn't guide you >>> towards >>> > those cases. >>> > >>> > I think massive "by-the-way" fixing is far worse than the targeted fix >>> > of a single issue. >>> > >>> > When you want to fix a single issue in many places, you become a >>> subject >>> > matter expert. You know all about that change, how it interacts with >>> > other tags, what to watch out for, how to handle bad values, etc. For >>> > example, when fixing wikipedia tags, you would see the types of >>> mistakes >>> > people make, wrong prefixes people use, incorrect url encodings, hash >>> > tags in urls, incorrect multiple values, ... . When you simply click >>> > "fix" because JOSM validator tells you it can fix it automatically, you >>> > don't have that knowledge, so it effectively becomes a distributed >>> > mechanical edit without the "reject" capability. My tool tries to >>> > address this - to build domain experts in a narrow field, and let those >>> > experts review changes one by one. I do not discount the value of local >>> > knowledge, but it is not a panacea - you must be both to make >>> > intelligent choices, and in some cases, the domain knowledge is more >>> > important than the knowledge of a specific locale. >>> > >>> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Michael Reichert >>> > <osm...@michreichert.de <mailto:osm...@michreichert.de>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi Yuri, >>> > >>> > Am 16.10.2017 um 16:02 schrieb Yuri Astrakhan: >>> > > Rory, most of those queries were copied from the current JOSM >>> validator >>> > > autofixes. I don't think they were discussed, but they might >>> have been >>> > > mass applied without much thought by all sorts of editors. >>> > >>> > Could you please give examples for (a) the mass appliance of these >>> rules >>> > and (b) rules which have not been discussed but should have been >>> > discussed? >>> > > There are two ways to use the tool - you can write your own >>> query, run it, >>> > > and fix whatever it is you want to fix. That's the power user >>> mode - >>> > > anything goes, no different from JOSM or Level0. And there is >>> another one - >>> > > where you go to osm wiki, read the instructions, find the task >>> you may want >>> > > to work on, and go at it. The community reviews wiki content, >>> tags >>> > > different pages with different explanation or warning boxes, >>> etc. The >>> > > discussion could still be on the forum, or here, or in IRC, .... >>> > >>> > Just for future readers: IRC and Telegram channels are no >>> replacement >>> > for a mailing list or a forum with a public readable archive where >>> you >>> > can look up the discussions years later. >>> > >>> > Best regards >>> > >>> > Michael >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. >>> (Mailinglisten >>> > ausgenommen) >>> > I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing >>> lists) >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > talk mailing list >>> > talk@openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org> >>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> > <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > talk mailing list >>> > talk@openstreetmap.org >>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> > >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> talk mailing list >>> talk@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> > > > -- > -- > http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/ > r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.de ryszard.mi...@gmail.com > > دراجة أكبر > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
