Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

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

Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Warin
On 24/01/2015 11:51 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: ON the subject of man_made=tap
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Pieren <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Kotya Karapetyan <[hidden email]> wrote:

> As of today, a total of 16 votes have been submitted, 11 of them are
> approvals. Since 2 weeks have passed and the required number of votes
> (15) has been reached, I have closed the voting and will proceed with
> clean up.


In fact, the proposal passed the wiki vote ONLY because the three people voted no at the
last minute.  If it were not for those 'no' votes, the proposal would have failed.

All that shows in part how dysfunctional the wiki vote system is.


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Here here!
It also shows how dysfunctional this group is .. not many of you vote!


I would suggest
1) Continued membership of this group be conditional on voting on at least half the tags presented for voting over say the last year.
2) Rejoining members be conditional on voting on at least 8 of the next 10 tags presented for voting.
3) Tag voting may only cease when at least 25%? of the tag group members have voted and 3? weeks have elapsed.

----------------
The old saying .. vote early, vote often springs to mind. Be carefull of the options in No 3 .. if you make the time short and the voting numbers small people may not be able to meet the conditions of No 1 or No2 !!!!


Yes .. it makes the admin more complex. But it will get some to say something, and get others off the group. Flame away.





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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Richard Welty-2
On 1/23/15 8:37 PM, Warin wrote:

Yes .. it makes the admin more complex. But it will get some to say something, and get others off the group. Flame away.


i do not think it appropriate for the membership of this group
to set these sorts of parameters for controlling its membership. it
goes against the grain of OSM as a project.

richard
-- 
[hidden email]
 Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
 OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
 Java - Web Applications - Search

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

John Willis

> On Jan 24, 2015, at 11:04 AM, Richard Welty <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 1/23/15 8:37 PM, Warin wrote:
>>
>> Yes .. it makes the admin more complex. But it will get some to say something, and get others off the group. Flame away.
>>
> i do not think it appropriate for the membership of this group
> to set these sorts of parameters for controlling its membership. it
> goes against the grain of OSM as a project.

I think any body that dedicates itself to managing something aught to actually manage it - I think that is the reason this came up.

But I think there is an even better reason that a lot of members don’t vote on proposals, besides a lack of enthusiasm in regards to what the tag fleshed out -

a Lack of domain knowledge coupled with a lack of a (somewhat) rigid tagging schema that can be applied across similar groups of tags.

For example - the discussion raging over semicolon delineated tag values vs sub-key values is something I have no relevant experience in, and I couldn’t comment on it, let alone feel comfortable voting.

Similar to the water tap issue - I voted for the water tap because I want a way to tag taps - but the issues  coming up now about it breaking compatibility of the dataset is something I similarly don’t know, and I will refrain from commenting now.  Same with the Kiln questions in Tibet.

But if there ware a more uniform tagging scheme then it would probably be obvious to a majority of the list members if a proposal *at least* properly fits into the format of tagging for a certain class of object  (bus routes, water taps, and buildings are all going to have different schema, of course) but there are several classes of tags where there is no set “standard” on how to implement the class, which makes proposals in that class a nightmare because it just devolves into what implementation schema should be followed. Since there a lot of older established tags and schemes that don’t follow more recent patterns, it just be comes a quagmire of what of all possible schemes something could fall under.

My recent proposal of Landuse=civic is a good case in point - does everything get it’s specific landuse from amenity=* , like a hospital or a school? does it get’s a basic idea of purpose from the landuse area, like residential or commercial land? or is the idea of separating out governmental/civic amenities disliked - and the only big distinction should be between civilian and military? Handling police, fire, judicial, penal, and governmental building’s landuse becomes a fight over what scheme is better - or what key scheme is best, and no one can agree on that. - a courthouse isn’t commercial land - a police station isn’t a residence, and a City hall is more than Just a building.

Those basic questions hamstring discussions - then coupled with how the changes will affect the dataset means people will inherently shy away from voting on proposals - or proposals will languish because there can be no definitive answer on something like landuse, since there are two basic kinds of tags, and I don’t think anyone wants to depreciate amenity=hospital from it’s landuse duties, nor landuse=industrial.

And most taggers probably don’t understand the intricacies of supporting semicolon delineated values, nor kilns in tibet - so it makes it hard for everyone to vote.

Opinions of the noob

Javbw




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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Marc Gemis
In reply to this post by Warin

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 2:37 AM, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
I would suggest
1) Continued membership of this group be conditional on voting on at least half the tags presented for voting over say the last year.
2) Rejoining members be conditional on voting on at least 8 of the next 10 tags presented for voting.
3) Tag voting may only cease when at least 25%? of the tag group members have voted and 3? weeks have elapsed.

I joined this list in other to learn about tagging, not to dictate other mappers how they should tag. I'm not interested in several tags that have gone through voting. Do you want me to vote on things I don't know about or not interested in (never needed to map a watertap), you should at least offer the possibility to express that I stay on the sideline.

This mailing list only attracts a very small fraction of the mappers. Maybe you should first answer that question before changing the rules. Also, before  changing the rules, try find to a large audience on how tags should be structured. Is it ok to have lot's of different keys on the top level ? How to deal with multivalues (to semicolon-or-not) ? etc.

Unfortunately I don't see how those technical things can appeal to a lot of mappers.

regards

m

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Serge Wroclawski-2
In reply to this post by John Willis
There seems to be conflation of this list as having some kind of
administrative function. It doesn't.

This isn't an OSMF working group, it's a discussion list, and as such
there is no administrative function for this list beyond the
boundraries of the voting process on the wiki.

In OSM, "official" tags have no greater status than unofficial ones.

If you'd want to change that, you'd need to change things in OSM at a
far more fundamental level, and (frankly), I'd be very hesistant to
see this happen.

I do think there'd be value in some practical tagging cleanup- moving
from 2-3 tags meaning the same thing to a single tag, through some
agreed-on process, but I don't think this is the right forum for it.

- Serge

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Martin Vonwald (Imagic)
Hi!

2015-01-24 13:21 GMT+01:00 Serge Wroclawski <[hidden email]>:
There seems to be conflation of this list as having some kind of
administrative function. It doesn't.

This isn't an OSMF working group, it's a discussion list, and as such
there is no administrative function for this list beyond the
boundraries of the voting process on the wiki.

In OSM, "official" tags have no greater status than unofficial ones.

Fully agree.
I want to quote one of our core values: "OSM is not a hierarchical organisation; almost everything can be done without need for central sanction or even post-hoc approval."
 

If you'd want to change that, you'd need to change things in OSM at a
far more fundamental level, and (frankly), I'd be very hesistant to
see this happen.

If someone wants to change this and actually succeeds, I'll not be around here any more. And I guess I won't be the only one.

 
I do think there'd be value in some practical tagging cleanup- moving
from 2-3 tags meaning the same thing to a single tag, through some
agreed-on process,

Fully agree.

 
but I don't think this is the right forum for it.

Isn't it? Well, then at least it should be.


Best regards,
Martin


 


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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Paul Johnson-3
In reply to this post by Warin
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 24/01/2015 11:51 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: ON the subject of man_made=tap
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Pieren <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Kotya Karapetyan <[hidden email]> wrote:

> As of today, a total of 16 votes have been submitted, 11 of them are
> approvals. Since 2 weeks have passed and the required number of votes
> (15) has been reached, I have closed the voting and will proceed with
> clean up.


In fact, the proposal passed the wiki vote ONLY because the three people voted no at the
last minute.  If it were not for those 'no' votes, the proposal would have failed.

All that shows in part how dysfunctional the wiki vote system is
Here here!
It also shows how dysfunctional this group is .. not many of you vote!

OK, well, I'm going to have to swap out my normal role as the crazy map bear for a minute to be the unpopular opinion puffin:  Nobody votes because it's a borderline pointless endeavor.  And I don't mean like pointless like being one of the (far too few) voters who isn't too insane or stupid to be able to hold down a day job, yet willing to risk taking a half-day off work on a non-holiday Tuesday off to actually go vote in Oklahoma, where voting could actually have an impact if the non-insane idiot contingent could actually get a quorum over the elections regulars.  But actually, entirely pointless, since tags reach a uniform consensus not by how they're decreed in some wiki through a convoluted proposal and elections process, but by people who just start using them.

And it seems for the most part, the tags with the most staying power seem to be ones that were natural fits, and then were documented how they're actually used in the wiki retroactively.
 
I would suggest
1) Continued membership of this group be conditional on voting on at least half the tags presented for voting over say the last year.
2) Rejoining members be conditional on voting on at least 8 of the next 10 tags presented for voting.
3) Tag voting may only cease when at least 25%? of the tag group members have voted and 3? weeks have elapsed.

I say scrap the whole thing and let the wiki document the map much like the map documents the ground truth. 

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

AlaskaDave
+1 "Nobody votes because it's a borderline pointless endeavor."

I joined this group to effect changes in tagging things of interest to me. But the discussions inevitably go round and round with nary a thing getting resolved. If someone has what seems like a good idea there is always someone else who takes issue with it.  

Frankly, getting anything done is just too time consuming. I realize getting consensus on a topic is a difficult goal but I decided to just avoid using any controversial tags. There's enough basic mapping needed where I live to keep me plenty busy.

.

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Paul Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 24/01/2015 11:51 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: ON the subject of man_made=tap
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Pieren <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Kotya Karapetyan <[hidden email]> wrote:

> As of today, a total of 16 votes have been submitted, 11 of them are
> approvals. Since 2 weeks have passed and the required number of votes
> (15) has been reached, I have closed the voting and will proceed with
> clean up.


In fact, the proposal passed the wiki vote ONLY because the three people voted no at the
last minute.  If it were not for those 'no' votes, the proposal would have failed.

All that shows in part how dysfunctional the wiki vote system is
Here here!
It also shows how dysfunctional this group is .. not many of you vote!

OK, well, I'm going to have to swap out my normal role as the crazy map bear for a minute to be the unpopular opinion puffin:  Nobody votes because it's a borderline pointless endeavor.  And I don't mean like pointless like being one of the (far too few) voters who isn't too insane or stupid to be able to hold down a day job, yet willing to risk taking a half-day off work on a non-holiday Tuesday off to actually go vote in Oklahoma, where voting could actually have an impact if the non-insane idiot contingent could actually get a quorum over the elections regulars.  But actually, entirely pointless, since tags reach a uniform consensus not by how they're decreed in some wiki through a convoluted proposal and elections process, but by people who just start using them.

And it seems for the most part, the tags with the most staying power seem to be ones that were natural fits, and then were documented how they're actually used in the wiki retroactively.
 
I would suggest
1) Continued membership of this group be conditional on voting on at least half the tags presented for voting over say the last year.
2) Rejoining members be conditional on voting on at least 8 of the next 10 tags presented for voting.
3) Tag voting may only cease when at least 25%? of the tag group members have voted and 3? weeks have elapsed.

I say scrap the whole thing and let the wiki document the map much like the map documents the ground truth. 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging




--
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Jonathan Bennett-2
In reply to this post by Warin
Scene 7. Ext. Prehistoric Planet

FORD:
You don’t seem to understand…

MAN IN CROWD:
No, no, no I just -

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
It’s a simple matter! It’s a procedural matter! That’s the point!

CAPTAIN:
Alright, alright, alright, alright!

CHAIRMAN:
I’d like to call this meeting to some sort of order, if that is at all
possible.

CROWD MEMBER:
Care for a light drink sir?

CHAIRMAN:
Uh, not now love…

FORD:
Look! C’mon please! I mean everybody! there is some important news:
we’ve made a discovery.

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
Is it on the agenda?

FORD:
Oh don’t give me that!

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
Well I’m sorry, but speaking as a fully trained management consultant I
must insist on the importance of observing the committee structure.

CROWD MEMBERS:
Yeah, yeah, yeah!.

FORD:
On a prehistoric planet!?

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
Address the chair.

CROWD MEMBERS:
Yes.

FORD:
There isn’t a chair! There’s only a rock!

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
Well, call it a chair.

FORD:
Why not call it a rock?

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
You - you obviously have no conception of modern business methods…

FORD:
And you have no conception of where the hell you are -

MARKETING GIRL:
Oh look shut up you two, just shut up! I want to table a motion. Guy:
Boulder a motion you mean…

FORD:
Tha-Thank you I think I’ve made that point! Now listen! Someone: Order,
Order!

FORD:
Oh God!

CHAIRMAN:
Listen! I would like to call to order the five-hundred-and-seventy-third
meeting of the colonization committee of the planet of Fintlewoodlewix.
And furthermore -

FORD:
Oh this is futile! Five-hundred-and-seventy-three committee meetings and
you haven’t even discovered fire yet!

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
If you would care to look at the agenda sheet -

GUY:
Agenda rock, yes…

FORD:
Oh, go on back home or something will ya?

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
…you will see that we are about to have a report from the hairdressers
fire development subcommittee today.

HAIRDRESSER:
That’s me.

FORD:
Yeah well you know what they’ve done don’t you? You gave them a couple
of sticks and they’ve gone and developed them in to a pair of bloody
scissors!

MARKETING GIRL:
When you have been in marketing as long as I have, you’ll know that
before any new product can be developed, it has to be properly
researched. I mean yes, yes we’ve got to find out what people want from
fire, I mean how do they relate to it, the image -

FORD:
Oh, stick it up your nose.

MARKETING GIRL:
Yes which is precisely the sort of thing we need to know, I mean do
people want fire that can be fitted nasally.

CHAIRMAN:
Yes, and, and, and the wheel. What about this wheel thingy? Sounds a
terribly interesting project to me.

MARKETING GIRL:
Er, yeah, well we’re having a little, er, difficulty here…

FORD:
Difficulty?! It’s the single simplest machine in the entire universe!

MARKETING GIRL:
Well alright mister wise guy, if you’re so clever you tell us what
colour it should be!

FORD:
Oh Mighty Zarquon! Has no-one done anything?

MARKETING GIRL:
And of course Finlon the producer has rescued a camera from the wreckage
of the ship and is making a fascinating documentary on the indigenous
cavemen of the area.

FORD:
Oh yes, and they’re dying out, have you noticed that?

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
Yes we must make a note sir to stop selling them life insurance.

FORD:
But don’t you understand? Just since we’ve arrived they’ve started dying
out.

MARKETING GIRL:
Yes! Yes! And this comes over terribly well in the film that he’s
making. I gather that he wants to, eh, make a documentary about you next
captain.

CAPTAIN:
What? Oh. Oh really? That’s awfully nice.

MARKETING GIRL:
Oh, he’s got a very strong angle on it: you know the burden of
responsibility, the loneliness of command…

CAPTAIN:
Ah well I wouldn’t overstress that angle you know, I mean one’s never
alone with a rubber duck…

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
Er, sir, er, skipper?

CAPTAIN:
Want a squeeze, eh?

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
Um listen, if we could, er, for a moment move on to the subject of
fiscal policy -

FORD:
”Fiscal Policy”?!

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
Yes.

FORD:
How can you have money if none of you actually produce anything? It
doesn’t grow on trees you know!

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
You know If you would allow me to continue!

CAPTAIN:
Yes let him to continue.

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
Since we decided a few weeks ago to adopt leaves as legal tender, we
have, of course all become immensely rich.

FORD:
No really? Really?

CROWD MEMBERS:
Yes, very good move…

MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT:
But, we have also run into a small inflation problem on account of the
high level of leaf availability. Which means that I gather the current
going rate has something like three major deciduous forests buying one
ship’s peanut. So, um, in order to obviate this problem and effectively
revalue the leaf, we are about to embark on an extensive defoliation
campaign, and um, burn down all the forests. I think that’s a sensible
move don’t you?

MARKETING GIRL:
That makes economic sense.

[Murmurs of agreement from crowd]

FORD:
[Yells] You’re absolutely barmy! You’ve a bunch of raving nutters!

MARKETING GIRL:
Well is it - perhaps - in order to inquire what you have been doing all
this time, huh?

CROWD MEMBERS:
Yes!

MARKETING GIRL:
Yes, you and that other interloper have been missing for months.

FORD:
Well, with respect love, we have been travelling around trying to find
out about this planet.

MARKETING GIRL:
Well, that doesn’t sound very productive. I mean I’ve looked -

FORD:
Well I have got news, I have got news for you. It doesn’t matter a pair
feted dingo’s kidneys what you all choose to do from now on. Burn down
the forests, anything. It won’t make a scrap of difference. Two-million
years you’ve got, and that’s it. At the end of that, your race will be
dead, gone, and good-riddance to you. Remember that. Two. Million. Years.

CAPTAIN:
Ah. It’s time for another bath. Hmph. Pass me the sponge somebody will you?

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

brycenesbitt
In reply to this post by Paul Johnson-3
And it seems for the most part, the tags with the most staying power seem to be ones that were natural fits, and then were documented how they're actually used in the wiki retroactively.

A mostly +1 on that.

The problem tags however are the ones with murky meaning, that can never be sorted out later without a field survey that will never happen.

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Serge Wroclawski-2
In reply to this post by Martin Vonwald (Imagic)
Martin,

Let me elaborate on what I mean by this not being the right forum.

I agree with you that it should be. The problem is that in my time on
this list- I've seen some pretty wacky ideas that go against what I
think most OSMers would consider good tagging.

I'd be worried about the results.

- Serge

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Martin Vonwald <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> 2015-01-24 13:21 GMT+01:00 Serge Wroclawski <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> There seems to be conflation of this list as having some kind of
>> administrative function. It doesn't.
>>
>> This isn't an OSMF working group, it's a discussion list, and as such
>> there is no administrative function for this list beyond the
>> boundraries of the voting process on the wiki.
>>
>> In OSM, "official" tags have no greater status than unofficial ones.
>
>
> Fully agree.
> I want to quote one of our core values: "OSM is not a hierarchical
> organisation; almost everything can be done without need for central
> sanction or even post-hoc approval."
>
>
>> If you'd want to change that, you'd need to change things in OSM at a
>> far more fundamental level, and (frankly), I'd be very hesistant to
>> see this happen.
>
>
> If someone wants to change this and actually succeeds, I'll not be around
> here any more. And I guess I won't be the only one.
>
>
>>
>> I do think there'd be value in some practical tagging cleanup- moving
>> from 2-3 tags meaning the same thing to a single tag, through some
>> agreed-on process,
>
>
> Fully agree.
>
>
>>
>> but I don't think this is the right forum for it.
>
>
> Isn't it? Well, then at least it should be.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Martin
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

moltonel 3x Combo
In reply to this post by AlaskaDave
On 24/01/2015, Dave Swarthout <[hidden email]> wrote:
> "Nobody votes because it's a borderline pointless endeavor."

I'd like to defend the voting system a bit. In my opinion it's working
fine. The only issue is that people have wrong expectations as to what
voting provides.

As has already been pointed out, there's no such thing as an OSM
authority that can say "this is the only correct way to map" (and
neither should there be). And the voters are a self-selected,
non-representative, biased population.

So what is voting good for ? I see it as just part of the discussion.
It's easyer for people to "vote" than to post lenghty arguments on a
mailing list or forum. Is proposition Foo generally accepted ? Look at
taginfo, look at voting, view some current osm data. They're all
important hints which will help you form an opinion. Maybe proposition
Bar has been largely voted against, but I still really prefer it to
the alternative and it seems like *some* people agree with me, so I
take the votes into account but still make my own informed decision.

The "make up your own tag in concertation with others" philosophy is
deeply ingrained in OSM. Voting is just one of many layers on top of
it. Reforming voting won't change the deeper nature of OSM.

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Paul Johnson-3
In reply to this post by AlaskaDave
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Dave Swarthout <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 "Nobody votes because it's a borderline pointless endeavor."

I joined this group to effect changes in tagging things of interest to me. But the discussions inevitably go round and round with nary a thing getting resolved. If someone has what seems like a good idea there is always someone else who takes issue with it.  

The mailing lists and just going out and tagging seem to do more good than calling convoluted proposals and voting sessions, so there's that.  For best results, get a working model going first.  It's not like the database is going to kick out esoterickey=unknownvalue...

Frankly, getting anything done is just too time consuming. I realize getting consensus on a topic is a difficult goal but I decided to just avoid using any controversial tags. There's enough basic mapping needed where I live to keep me plenty busy.

This.  Also glad Mapillary is a thing; I'm starting to try to use this to avoid having to rely so heavily on memory and searching geolocations on photos I've taken and hoping it happened to capture what I need... 

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Paul Johnson-3
In reply to this post by brycenesbitt
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Bryce Nesbitt <[hidden email]> wrote:
And it seems for the most part, the tags with the most staying power seem to be ones that were natural fits, and then were documented how they're actually used in the wiki retroactively.

A mostly +1 on that.

The problem tags however are the ones with murky meaning, that can never be sorted out later without a field survey that will never happen.

Oh FFS...I'm pretty sure I've said it before, but I'll say it again:  If you can cover my costs, I'll be happy to ground truth anyplace I can legally go with a US passport (which, as of this writing, seems to be everywhere but Cuba, Canada and North Korea) and figure it out.  Honestly I'd rather be a cartographer for a living anyway... 

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Warin
In reply to this post by Paul Johnson-3
On 2/02/2015 4:34 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Dave Swarthout <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 "Nobody votes because it's a borderline pointless endeavor."

Yep.
Thus things don't get approved due to lack of votes because few vote.
And few vote because even a negative vote can cause the minimum number of required votes to be exceed, enabling an acceptance.
And some want more that a simple majority in order to accept things.

 Thus the need to reform.

Ok .. I can see that compulsion on voting won't work...

So ... How about

A 3 week minimum voting period - Gives people enough time fore a holiday and then think and caste  vote.
From this 3 week period the proposer may close the voting if a minimum number of votes are received and a 2/3rds majority vote for or against.
At 6 weeks and onwards the proposer may close the voting no matter how few votes have been received and base the acceptance or failure on a simple majority.
At one year the voting closes. No option, result on simple majority, if 50/50 then the proposal passes.

This provides for a chance for people to vote, for consideration time, and at 6 weeks an incentive to vote as it can be called no matter how few have voted.



I joined this group to effect changes in tagging things of interest to me. But the discussions inevitably go round and round with nary a thing getting resolved. If someone has what seems like a good idea there is always someone else who takes issue with it.  

The mailing lists and just going out and tagging seem to do more good than calling convoluted proposals and voting sessions, so there's that.  For best results, get a working model going first.  It's not like the database is going to kick out esoterickey=unknownvalue...

Frankly, getting anything done is just too time consuming.

Yep. Thus it needs reform.



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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Paul Johnson-3

You're missing the point.  OSM is already a meritocracy and tagging schemes either float or they don't, in the wild, under their own merit.  There's no reforms that could be made to change this short of locking out the ability to use key and value combinations that aren't anointed.  Good luck with that.

On Feb 11, 2015 4:53 PM, "Warin" <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 2/02/2015 4:34 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Dave Swarthout <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 "Nobody votes because it's a borderline pointless endeavor."

Yep.
Thus things don't get approved due to lack of votes because few vote.
And few vote because even a negative vote can cause the minimum number of required votes to be exceed, enabling an acceptance.
And some want more that a simple majority in order to accept things.

 Thus the need to reform.

Ok .. I can see that compulsion on voting won't work...

So ... How about

A 3 week minimum voting period - Gives people enough time fore a holiday and then think and caste  vote.
From this 3 week period the proposer may close the voting if a minimum number of votes are received and a 2/3rds majority vote for or against.
At 6 weeks and onwards the proposer may close the voting no matter how few votes have been received and base the acceptance or failure on a simple majority.
At one year the voting closes. No option, result on simple majority, if 50/50 then the proposal passes.

This provides for a chance for people to vote, for consideration time, and at 6 weeks an incentive to vote as it can be called no matter how few have voted.



I joined this group to effect changes in tagging things of interest to me. But the discussions inevitably go round and round with nary a thing getting resolved. If someone has what seems like a good idea there is always someone else who takes issue with it.  

The mailing lists and just going out and tagging seem to do more good than calling convoluted proposals and voting sessions, so there's that.  For best results, get a working model going first.  It's not like the database is going to kick out esoterickey=unknownvalue...

Frankly, getting anything done is just too time consuming.

Yep. Thus it needs reform.



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

brycenesbitt
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Paul Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:

You're missing the point.  OSM is already a meritocracy and tagging schemes either float or they don't, in the wild, under their own merit.  There's no reforms that could be made to change this short of locking out the ability to use key and value combinations that aren't anointed.  Good luck with that.


Yet... the debate that the wiki vote system engenders often (not always) improves the tagging proposals.
Thus, the broken wiki vote system has value.

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

Re: Tagging Voting system- time for reform?

Christopher Hoess
In reply to this post by Paul Johnson-3
That's somewhat overstates the case. Adoption vs. non-adoption is the acid test of whether a proposal is acceptable or not, but the laissez-faire approach does let the tagging get stuck in "local minima". For instance, the initial development of "railway" mashed together several distinct and independent attributes under one key: gauge between rails (railway=narrow_gauge, railway=miniature), type of service (railway=preserved), lifecycle (railway=disused, railway=abandoned, railway=construction). This works OK about 98% of the time, but sometimes these values come into conflict (a preserved narrow gauge railway that's disused due to washouts)? 

In retrospect, a little forethought would quickly have identified these problems and allowed us to draft a more expressive tagging scheme that would have avoided this. And one has, sort of, grown up around this (the "gauge" key, and OpenRailwayMap has started using "railway:preserved=yes"). But since we've also decided that, socially, mass retagging of old data is on a par with public defecation, we're more or less permanently stuck with the deficiencies of the original scheme that "just grew".

Don't get me wrong--I see a lot of the proposals that float across this list and it's clear that many proposed tagging schemes have a precision or level of detail that vastly exceeds what anyone will ever map. You could also, reasonably, argue that if we'd had a more complex railway tagging scheme initially, it would have hindered mapping, or that we only retrospectively know that the attributes I've listed are important to map because they became common under the initial scheme. The idea that the current process is the best possible way to develop tagging smacks of Dr. Pangloss.

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Paul Johnson <[hidden email]> wrote:

You're missing the point.  OSM is already a meritocracy and tagging schemes either float or they don't, in the wild, under their own merit.  There's no reforms that could be made to change this short of locking out the ability to use key and value combinations that aren't anointed.  Good luck with that.



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging