Colour coding of wiki description boxes

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
19 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Frederik Ramm
Hi,

   I'm finding myself in a little edit war with user Xxzme on the wiki
(is there a club?) over my objection to the use of the colour red for
tag description boxes that describe tags with the any of the following
statuses:

discardable
deprecated
obsolete
inactive
abandoned
rejected

I think that is wrong to colour-code the whole box red for "deprecated"
feature, for the usual reason - it only takes a handful of people to
"deprecate" something and this could easily lead to widely used tags
being shown in red, leading people to believe that there is something
wrong about them.

The colour coding was introduced a while ago without any discussion, and
I think it wields too much power to be decided on by one single Wiki
editor. I would therefore like to encourage discussion about colour
coding of tag description boxes, either here or on

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template_talk:DescriptionStatus

and I would recommend to stick to neutral colouring until something
approaching a consensus has been established.

Bye
Frederik

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail [hidden email]  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Andreas Goss
I don't think it's such a bad idea, what annoys me more is that defacto
is beige, when most tags are bascially on the same level as apporved and
should be green.

I think marking those listed red is somewhat helpful. Maybe we should
rather have a tag status like disputed, which can be used when there is
no clear agreement to prevent abuse.

Also would be nice if  proposed/voting/draft and unspecified would not
be the same color. Unspecified should somewhat be a "call to action"
color to tell me I should add the value there.
__________
openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

jgpacker
I agree with Andreas that the current colour of "defacto" is misleading.

In fact, most current colours could be improved, and it would be a good idea to turn off colour-coding until a consensus has been reached (since it affects the whole goddamn wiki).

And please, let's not colour-code the whole infobox. It looks awful. Example: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:escalator
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Andreas Goss




> Am 27.04.2015 um 20:14 schrieb Andreas Goss <[hidden email]>:
>
> Maybe we should rather have a tag status like disputed, which can be used when there is no clear agreement to prevent abuse.


we might end up with a lot of disputed tags if the bar is set too low, I'm a bit reluctant to a "disputed" status. Maybe a flag to sign that there / which are alternative tags in use which might be able as well to describe the object/property would be more helpful.


Cheers
Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Andrew Guertin
In reply to this post by Frederik Ramm
On 04/27/2015 01:26 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>     I'm finding myself in a little edit war with user Xxzme on the wiki
> (is there a club?) over my objection to the use of the colour red for
> tag description boxes that describe tags with the any of the following
> statuses:

Can we also reject a red/green/yellow color scheme as not friendly to
people who are colorblind?

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

brycenesbitt
 +1 that there's a problem here of the wiki pretending to be more than it it is.  Xxzme's "bold" edits often exacerbate that.

--
When it comes to "deprecated" and "obsolete" tags I basically feel that if you can't get enough worldwide consent to re-tag, the tags are not really obsolete or deprecated.  The partial deprecation approach is bad for mappers bad for the data bad for data consumers.

The wiki bar is already far too low for deprecation, and the colour red goes too far in discouraging use of a tag that may be perfectly valid, wanted and even widely used.

Since deprecation is nuanced condition in OSM the wiki should reflect that nuance. Bringing editor support indications into the wiki would help. A feature that's deprecated in Keepright/osmose/JOSM and iD is very different from a feature that three people got together and marked deprecated on the Wiki.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Warin
On 29/04/2015 4:30 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:

>  +1 that there's a problem here of the wiki pretending to be more than
> it it is.  Xxzme's "bold" edits often exacerbate that.
>
> --
> When it comes to "deprecated" and "obsolete" tags I basically feel
> that if you can't get enough worldwide consent to re-tag, the tags are
> not really obsolete or deprecated. The partial deprecation approach is
> bad for mappers bad for the data bad for data consumers.
>
> The wiki bar is already far too low for deprecation, and the colour
> red goes too far in discouraging use of a tag that may be perfectly
> valid, wanted and even widely used.
>
> Since deprecation is nuanced condition in OSM the wiki should reflect
> that nuance. Bringing editor support indications into the wiki would
> help. A feature that's deprecated in Keepright/osmose/JOSM and iD is
> very different from a feature that three people got together and
> marked deprecated on the Wiki.
>

Where some tag is 'depreciated' then the alternative tag should be
highlighted. The mapper then can make the choice.

Colours?
Ok with the colour blind thing .. need to state what colours are best so
choices can be made from them.

Why does the entire box need to be done in the chosen colour?? Why not
just do the status text in bold in that colour? This reduces the
significance of the status... may be leave the whole box colours for
things of more significance ... status=abandoned?

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Christoph Hormann
In reply to this post by Frederik Ramm
On Monday 27 April 2015, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> I think that is wrong to colour-code the whole box red for
> "deprecated" feature, for the usual reason - it only takes a handful
> of people to "deprecate" something and this could easily lead to
> widely used tags being shown in red, leading people to believe that
> there is something wrong about them.

Yes, the proposal process is simply unsuited in a meritocratic system
like OSM for tags that are currently in significant use.  It makes a
lot of sense to discuss and evaluate new tags from scratch or to
decommission tags that have gone out of use almost completely.  
Unfortunately these applications of the proposal system are rare these
days and it is too often used to push a certain tagging scheme against
competing ideas.

Or to phrase it differently - the opinion of mappers using a tag should
weight at least as much as those of people voting on a tag proposal and
it is a problem when a tag that is actively used by 100 people is
deprecate by votes of just a few.  Same goes the other way round of
course - a proposal rejection despite a lot of people following it does
not really mean that much.

Instead of a deprecatation proposal on a actively used tag the arguments
against it should be put up in the tag documentation to convince
mappers not to use it rather than discouraging them by use of signal
colors.  There is for example the {{Verifiability}} template that can
be used to indicate tags that are vague in definition.

--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Andreas Goss
In reply to this post by brycenesbitt
> When it comes to "deprecated" and "obsolete" tags I basically feel that
> if you can't get enough worldwide consent to re-tag

The problem is that everybody is so strong against mechanical edits that
it is pretty much impossible most of the time. And manual retags are
often not worth the time.
In addition even then you might want to keep the wiki page.

__________
openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88
wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88‎


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Matthijs Melissen
On 4 May 2015 at 05:23, Andreas Goss <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The problem is that everybody is so strong against mechanical edits that it
> is pretty much impossible most of the time

No, not everybody is against mechanical edits, not even a majority.

The problem is that there is a very vocal minority against mechanical
edits, and that minority is of the opinion that a majority cannot
approve mechanical edits if there is a minority that disagrees.

-- Matthijs

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Marc Gemis

No, not everybody is against mechanical edits, not even a majority.


pretty hard to tell when not all mappers were questioned or bothered to reply, not ? 
please do not try to draw such conclusions without hard numbers. it does not help your cause for mechanical edits.

regards

m. 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Frederik Ramm
In reply to this post by Matthijs Melissen
Hi,

On 05/04/2015 01:07 PM, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
> The problem is that there is a very vocal minority against mechanical
> edits, and that minority is of the opinion that a majority cannot
> approve mechanical edits if there is a minority that disagrees.

I think that if the majority of people who have used a certain tag is ok
with it being automatically changed into something else, then that's
something we can work with.

If, on the other hand, a majority of 20 against 10 people decide that
mechanically editing a widely used tag is a good idea, then that's not
good enough. At the very least I'd expect those who want to make the
edit to properly address the concerns of the minority instead of simply
trying to steamroll them by numbers.

The aim is to find a consensus or a compromise; and in the past, where
people have tried to replace consensus/comprimise with a simple counting
of votes, that has been called out. Simply doing whatever 51% of polled
people want is neither democratic nor good.

Bye
Frederik

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail [hidden email]  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Andy Mabbett
In reply to this post by Marc Gemis
On 5 May 2015 at 13:35, Marc Gemis <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> No, not everybody is against mechanical edits, not even a majority.

> pretty hard to tell when not all mappers were questioned or bothered to
> reply, not ?

If people choose not to (or are "not bothered to") comment, that's an
abstention.

Indeed, it may reasonably be argued that of they choose not to comment
on a proposal to do something, then they are content with the
proposal.

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

moltonel 3x Combo
On 05/05/2015, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:
> If people choose not to (or are "not bothered to") comment, that's an
> abstention.
>
> Indeed, it may reasonably be argued that of they choose not to comment
> on a proposal to do something, then they are content with the
> proposal.

It'd only be reasonable if those people were contacted. Discussions on
[tagging] or [talk] or the wiki are *not* a good way to contact
mappers for democratic opinion-gathering purposes. OSM doesn't have a
policy that interested contributors have to participate on this or
that dicussion medium. I've joined [tagging] very late in my OSM life
(and can't afford the time to read it all), but I've always been very
interested in any change to the data I've contributed.

It may be a PITA, but it's a fact. The closest thing we have to
officially contacting mappers (and filing them under
abstain/uninterested if they don't answer) is the private messages on
osm.org. But using that for a large number of users is frowned uppon.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Matthijs Melissen
On 6 May 2015 at 17:41, moltonel 3x Combo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It'd only be reasonable if those people were contacted. Discussions on
> [tagging] or [talk] or the wiki are *not* a good way to contact
> mappers for democratic opinion-gathering purposes. OSM doesn't have a
> policy that interested contributors have to participate on this or
> that dicussion medium. I've joined [tagging] very late in my OSM life
> (and can't afford the time to read it all), but I've always been very
> interested in any change to the data I've contributed.

Unfortunately, contacting mappers individually has a very low response rate.

For my bookmaker changes, I contacted 20 mappers individually through
the OSM messaging system. All of them were frequent mappers (17 of
them had more than 1000 changesets). I only received a response from
three of them. This was to ask me help with retagging, but I'd guess
asking them for their opinion would give a similar low response rate.
With less frequent mappers, I'd expect the response rate to be even
lower. So asking every single mapper of a certain tag for their
opinion is not really an option, I think.

-- Matthijs

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Andy Mabbett
In reply to this post by moltonel 3x Combo
On 6 May 2015 at 17:41, moltonel 3x Combo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 05/05/2015, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> If people choose not to (or are "not bothered to") comment, that's an
>> abstention.
>>
>> Indeed, it may reasonably be argued that of they choose not to comment
>> on a proposal to do something, then they are content with the
>> proposal.
>
> It'd only be reasonable if those people were contacted.

You'll note my use of the word "choose".

You've neglected to quote the post to which I was replying; it said:

>>> pretty hard to tell when not all mappers were questioned or bothered to reply, not ?

which includes the scenario where some editors "were not bothered to reply".

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

moltonel 3x Combo
On 06/05/2015, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 6 May 2015 at 17:41, moltonel 3x Combo <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 05/05/2015, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>> If people choose not to (or are "not bothered to") comment, that's an
>>> abstention.
>>>
>>> Indeed, it may reasonably be argued that of they choose not to comment
>>> on a proposal to do something, then they are content with the
>>> proposal.
>>
>> It'd only be reasonable if those people were contacted.
>
> You'll note my use of the word "choose".
>
> You've neglected to quote the post to which I was replying; it said:
>
>>>> pretty hard to tell when not all mappers were questioned or bothered to
>>>> reply, not ?
>
> which includes the scenario where some editors "were not bothered to reply".


We agree on the "not bothered to reply, therefore treat it as abstain" scenario.

But that original quote also mentioned the "not all mappers were
questioned" scenario, which is much more common. As Matthijs said,
contacting mappers individually has a very low response rate. So
instead, people use wiki votes and mailing list or forum threads as a
measure of the general opinion. That's practical but heavily biased.
Please don't think that it's the same thing as contacting mappers (and
then being able to assume that they agree if they don't respond).

Sorry for labouring the point if only replying to the "mappers were
contacted" scenario was intentional.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

brycenesbitt
In reply to this post by moltonel 3x Combo
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 9:41 AM, moltonel 3x Combo <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 05/05/2015, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Indeed, it may reasonably be argued that of they choose not to comment
> on a proposal to do something, then they are content with the
> proposal.

It'd only be reasonable if those people were contacted. Discussions on
[tagging] or [talk] or the wiki are *not* a good way to contact
mappers for democratic opinion-gathering purposes. 

One approach is to look up the most frequent mappers of the feature of interest.

There are several ways to do this, including a new proposed feature in JOSM:


 
That's a list of people who edited amenity=bicycle_repair_stand 

The full expression of that might be the concept of a community of people who "edit things like I edit". If I start editing campgrounds for example, perhaps the editor shows a chat window open to other people editing campgrounds.

---------------

The echo chamber of the tagging list, and the wiki process, does not fully represent the OSM community.

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Colour coding of wiki description boxes

Tod Fitch

> On May 6, 2015, at 9:48 PM, Bryce Nesbitt <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> The full expression of that might be the concept of a community of people who "edit things like I edit". If I start editing campgrounds for example, perhaps the editor shows a chat window open to other people editing campgrounds.
>
+1 Not sure how that might be implemented but I really like the idea.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

smime.p7s (2K) Download Attachment