On 12/06/2020 14:44, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 12.06.20 15:22, Dave F via talk wrote:
There is a lot of negativity about large changsets, but assessment of
them should be based on quality, not quantity.
Yes, we're not discussing a popup that says "You dumbass, why did you
create a world-spanning changeset?" ;)
I'm not convinced that's true. Already in this thread someone is blaming
large changesets purely because the verifying software they're using
isn't capable of dealing with them. Judge on quality not quantity.
The way in which editors deal with that would likely differ; in JOSM it
might be a popup that says "are you sure?" and in ID it might be a
floating warning somewhere.
Your example of a world-wide spelling fix as an acceptable edit does not
agree with me; these edits often have unwanted side effects. See
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org ("if someone has described a 'horse' as a
'kow' correcting the spelling to 'cow' does not make the description
correct").
Tenuous & assumptive.
It was just one "example".
OSM is a project of local knowlege.
Just because you believe that, it doesn't make it so.
Knowledge which effects OSM comes from many sources:
A walk though town where a new shop has opened, or BBC world news which
reports how a Far Eastern bridge building project has been cancelled &
the proposed data requires removing.
World-spanning changesets compatible
with that idea are not impossible but rare; and erroneous or even
rule-violating changesets
These rules require amending as they're based purely on size & the
criticism is usually in the form of " "You dumbass, why did you create a
world-spanning changeset?". Judge on quality not quantity.
are much more frequent among world-spanning
changesets than among everyday small bbox changesets.
I'm not convinced. This perception only occurs because changesets over
large areas stand out.
Cheers
DaveF
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
