My opinion on the new Organised editing guidelines
Posted by muramototomoya on 17 October 2018 in English.New Organised editing guidelines was proposed by DWG. I show my “negative” opition on that guidelines.
At first, I think the previous Directed Editing Policy was a good proposal. I like that. I really pay my respects to DWG’s works.
Most important point
- Scope is very vague. It could be applied to “mapping parties between friends” even it negate. I like the previous “Director/Directee” idea.
- Imports without any advance discussion are not acceptable. Use other service.
Previous Directed Editing Policy was better idea
- It says individual community members and organised editing groups are at same level playing field.
- must/should/may are properly used. I can easily understand which items are more important.
- Almost no duties for organised mapper/contributor/directee. Indicated duties are for general OMS mappers, those are not special for organised mapper.
Individual
- They are not meant to apply to community activities like mapping parties between friends or doing a presentation on OSM at a local club.
-> The reason this guideline is not to applied to communitiy activities is not shown. - any edits that involve more than one person and can be grouped under one or more sizeable, substantial, coordinated editing initiatives.
-> I can’t understand this definition - more substantial initiatives are expected to spend a more substantial amount of effort.
-> What’s “substantial”? Does it mean “mapping parties between friends” is “insubstantial”? - If the activity is a response to an emergency and no advance discussion is possible, the community should be informed as soon as is practical.
-> No. Use other service. For example, uMap could be your solution. - Contributors should respond to communication attempts made in good faith by other contributors.
-> This duty is for general OMS mappers, those are not special for organised mapper. - Any person or organisation whose actions affect the OpenStreetMap project has the duty to care for the project, and should respect the community’s consensus, mapping practices and guidelines.
-> This duty is for general OMS mappers, those are not special for organised mapper. - Edits to the map
-> (I can’t understand why the name of this section is “Edits to the map”) - People looking at individual changesets that are part of a organised mapping activity should be able to tell as soon as they look at a changeset.
->(I can’t understand what it means)
Discussion
Comment from Mateusz Konieczny on 19 October 2018 at 10:19
“the community should be informed as soon as is practical” is especially absurd and open to abuse.
You linked directly to the pdf download. Is there a place that describes status of this file? I am not sure is it a proposal, discarded draft or a something else.
“was proposed by DWG” - where and when it was proposed?
Comment from Mateusz Konieczny on 19 October 2018 at 10:20
”->(I can’t understand what it means)” - probably part of changeset comment should mention that it is a part of an organised mapping activity.
Comment from imagico on 19 October 2018 at 10:58
The new PDF draft was first mentioned in the September OSMF board meeting agenda/minutes. It was also introduced to the general OSM community in a diary entry here.
Comment from muramototomoya on 19 October 2018 at 11:05
Hi Mateusz,
Thank you for your explanation. Now I can understand that sentence. It seems very hard to understand for non-native speakers (I’m Japanese).
Comment from muramototomoya on 19 October 2018 at 11:06
Hi imagico,
Thank you for your follow-up. I missed to put links to them.