a facebook-page is not a website
This is silly. Of course a Facebook page is a website. It's delivered over HTTP (the "web") and accessible on a consistent, unchanging URL ("site"). It is none of our business whether a company has chosen to use Facebook, Wix, Squarespace, Wordpress or any other off-the-shelf hosting/design solution for their site.
By doing this, you are making it significantly less likely that data consumers will make use of mappers' contributions. For example, on cycle.travel, I show cyclists the website tag for a ferry (where available) so that they can look up current times of operation, charges, etc. I use the website tag for this. Under your change, I'd have to fall back to scanning every contact:* tag to see whether any of them begins with /https?:\/\//. Pretty obviously, lots of consumers aren't going to do this, so you've just made OSM data less accessible.
Please (a) stop doing this (b) go outside and do some useful mapping (c) in future, discuss mass changes like this in advance. Thank you.
Maproulette tells: "There is an extra tag for facebook pages: 'contact:facebook'. Even if a place does not have a website, the website tag is not intended for a Facebook page."
Maproulette is not infallible, and in this case is wrong. Can you provide a link to the Maproulette challenge?
... and the OSM Wiki clearly says that the thing the OP is "correcting" is perfectly valid mark up:
"If a social media web presence is the only web presence of the POI (point-of-interest), then some taggers prefer to also list the url using website=* to indicate that no other official website exists."
"some taggers prefer to.. " is quite soft. sounds like "that one is okay, too". but when both ones are okay and maproulett makes a challenge for the new contact:facebook, then things could possibly start to get changed. and now i get blamed for that. thats a little odd.
the challenge is separated in countries. e.g. for germany it is: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/16122
Thank you. Reported at https://twitter.com/richardf/status/1363909152582627328 .
"now i get blamed for that" - yes, because MapRoulette doesn't give you carte blanche to break stuff just because some rando who uploaded a challenge says so.
As this edit is in violation of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct anyone may revert it.
I did it right now.
In general, MapRoulette has many challenges that are pointless or encourage damaging of OSM data. Anyone may create task there, you must use your brain if you use it.
"now i get blamed for that" - yes, because you were already informed about necessity to consult local community and you continued to edit.
See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/99624114 - you were linked to rules about bot edits
This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 99862876 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of complaints, reverting some Facebook tagfiddling. See https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/99736842 et al.
https://www.facebook.com is a website. Every partial url on facebook is just a webpage, its neither a homepage, just a subpage of something that the operator facebook can change whenever Facebook wants to. The contact:facebook-tag is there for reasons and my changes did improve the values of those nodes/ways/... by even checking the availability of those urls when they were redirections on facebook.
Whats is provable: Facebook changes its URLs when they want to and they did in some places.
> https://www.facebook.com is a website. Every partial url on facebook is just a webpage
It is not changing that such webpages are also (sadly) used as websites by many businesses. Sometimes sole online presence.
Note wordpress.com and websites such as https://gesanwrc.wordpress.com/ (hopefully noone was moving such website tags to contact:wordpress )
> Whats is provable: Facebook changes its URLs when they want to and they did in some places.
And? This affect also contact:facebook and regular domains wholly owned by businesses
Thank you, Mateusz for your understandingly answer.
Afaik there is no tag contact:wordpress. But the point is, if you control your own website its is worth tagging that as website.
And website urls should be as short as possible.
For those who only have a facebook site there is a separate tag: contact:facebook. Perhaps we should go on diskussing that on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website
Has anyone passed details of this incident, and related changesets on to the Data Working Group as it seems to me there are issues here for them ...
@paulatthehug - Yes, someone raised a ticket with us late Monday night. We were also aware of people complaining about it elsewhere (including Twitter).
@0815jh007 Re "For those who only have a facebook site there is a separate tag: contact:facebook" that doesn't reflect real life - For many businesses their Facebook page IS their website. You might not like that, but that is how it is. For others of course it's a separate social channel with different content on it. That's essentially why an automatic retagging such as you have done is inappropriate. When tagging small businesses such as pubs I've often asked myself "is that facebook page their website, or is it just a social channel" and using an appropriate OSM tag based on that decision.
I agree with 0815jh007, contact:facebook=* or even facebook=* should be the correct way of mapping FB fan pages or profiles.
@santamariense The problem was that a number of Facebook websites aren't "FB fan pages or profiles", they're actually used by the business concerned as their website. Where both exist, I'd definitely map both. When adding a Facebook page for a business I'll always ask myself "is this basically their website or is it something else?".
Mateusz mentions https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct above. That specifically exists to make sure that people discuss changes such as this before performing them, to ensure that (a) their understanding of "how things are used in OSM" has the benefit of other points of view and (b) to let data consumers know about any change.
Please thing logically and take the following user story as a lead (I have experience in user experience design and have also contact some women doing it professionally):
User Story 1: User clicks on the 'Facebook' icon displayed on the POI and expects to be taken to the Facebook page.
User Story 2: User clicks on the "Website" icon displayed on the POI and expects to be taken to the non-Facebook page like example.com
Negating User Stories (only in combination with positive ones) and are mostly used for clarification but not standalone (not ideal example of its use here):
User Story 1: User clicks on the 'Facebook' icon displayed on the POI and does not expect to be taken to the website page outside Facebook domain.
User Story 2: User clicks on the "Website" icon displayed on the POI and does not expect to be taken to the Facebook page like https://facebook/example
> By doing this, you are making it significantly less likely that data consumers will make use of mappers' contributions.
Wrong assumption. Of course will data customers differentiate between pages created using Facebook (refered to "Facebook pages") and normal websites hosted on Wix, Jimdo, Strato, self hosting etc. And they always will no matter if the Facebook page is the only one "website" of the POI. It will be treated the same as all Facebook pages and does not get any special status for being the only one website the POI has.
You took the word right out of my mouth :-(
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by UCL, Fastly, Bytemark Hosting, and other partners.