proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
42 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Mateusz Konieczny-3
fixme tag is a standard way to mark fixmes.
Editors wishing to finish mapping in their area would (directly or
indirectly, for example using JOSM) look through objects tagged with
fixme tags.

FIXME tag is an unexpected way to mark fixmes, retagging this duplicate to
fixme key would improve tagging without any information loss.

It would make development of QA tools easier as authors would not need to
discover and implement support for this duplicated key.

Between X and Y objects are expected to be edited. See
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/FIXME#map for a
geographic distribution.

Changeset would be split into small areas to avoid continent-sized
bounding boxes. As this tag may be on extremely large objects (for example relations representing long routes) it may be unavoidable to make some edits with very large bounding boxes.

For documentation page see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/moving_FIXME_to_fixme
For documentation of my previous proposals (including both proposals
that failed to be approved and approved ones) see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account

Please comment - especially if there are any problems with this idea.
Please also comment if you support this edit, in case of no response
at all edit will not be made as there would be no evidence that
this idea is supported.

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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

James-2
are there any overlap with FIXME and fixme as in an object tagged with both? Is it possible or the osm API considers them the same(case insensitive)?

If there are no overlaps I dont see an issue tagging this the proper way

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018, 1:44 PM Mateusz Konieczny, <[hidden email]> wrote:
fixme tag is a standard way to mark fixmes.
Editors wishing to finish mapping in their area would (directly or
indirectly, for example using JOSM) look through objects tagged with
fixme tags.

FIXME tag is an unexpected way to mark fixmes, retagging this duplicate to
fixme key would improve tagging without any information loss.

It would make development of QA tools easier as authors would not need to
discover and implement support for this duplicated key.

Between X and Y objects are expected to be edited. See
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/FIXME#map for a
geographic distribution.

Changeset would be split into small areas to avoid continent-sized
bounding boxes. As this tag may be on extremely large objects (for example relations representing long routes) it may be unavoidable to make some edits with very large bounding boxes.

For documentation page see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/moving_FIXME_to_fixme
For documentation of my previous proposals (including both proposals
that failed to be approved and approved ones) see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account

Please comment - especially if there are any problems with this idea.
Please also comment if you support this edit, in case of no response
at all edit will not be made as there would be no evidence that
this idea is supported.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Andrew Hain
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3
Should we ask for validation steps in editors to flag FIXME as a likely tagging mistake going forwards?

--
Andrew

From: Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]>
Sent: 02 July 2018 18:42
To: Talk
Subject: [OSM-talk] proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*
 
fixme tag is a standard way to mark fixmes.
Editors wishing to finish mapping in their area would (directly or
indirectly, for example using JOSM) look through objects tagged with
fixme tags.

FIXME tag is an unexpected way to mark fixmes, retagging this duplicate to
fixme key would improve tagging without any information loss.

It would make development of QA tools easier as authors would not need to
discover and implement support for this duplicated key.

Between X and Y objects are expected to be edited. See
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/FIXME#map for a
geographic distribution.

Changeset would be split into small areas to avoid continent-sized
bounding boxes. As this tag may be on extremely large objects (for example relations representing long routes) it may be unavoidable to make some edits with very large bounding boxes.

For documentation page see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/moving_FIXME_to_fixme
For documentation of my previous proposals (including both proposals
that failed to be approved and approved ones) see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account

Please comment - especially if there are any problems with this idea.
Please also comment if you support this edit, in case of no response
at all edit will not be made as there would be no evidence that
this idea is supported.

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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Mateusz Konieczny-3
In reply to this post by James-2

2. Lipiec 2018 19:49 od [hidden email]:

are there any overlap with FIXME and fixme as in an object tagged with both?


Yes. http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/A0y


As described in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/moving_FIXME_to_fixme#How


- for objects with the same value in FIXME and fixme => FIXME tag gets deleted

- different content in FIXME and fixme => skipped without edit



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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Andy Mabbett
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3
On 2 July 2018 at 18:42, Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]> wrote:

> FIXME tag is an unexpected way to mark fixmes, retagging this duplicate to
> fixme key would improve tagging without any information loss.

Support. Very sensible move. I may in the past have used the later
version; I'd be grateful if such tags could be standardised.

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

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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Michael Reichert-3
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3
Hi Mateusz,

Am 02.07.2018 um 19:42 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny:
> Please comment - especially if there are any problems with this idea.
> Please also comment if you support this edit, in case of no response
> at all edit will not be made as there would be no evidence that
> this idea is supported.

There are 177,152 FIXME and 1,216,043 fixme according to Taginfo. I did
not have a closer look on the average age of FIXMEs and fixmes.

What's the benefit in this mechanical edit? It just sets the
last_modified attribute to a recent date and data consumers, mappers and
QA tools get the impression that the object is not old.

FIXME should make alarm bells ring in validator tools because its key
only contains uppercase characters.

If you want to search for uses of FIXME, use the OSM Inspector. It
supports FIXME case-insensitive for about ten years now (even our new
C++ implementation does). It does not matter if you write FiXmE, fIXMe
or FixmE. Btw, todo=* (lower case only) is also supported.

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=tagging&lon=8.48813&lat=49.06482&zoom=11&overlays=fixmes_on_nodes,fixmes_on_ways

Fixmes tend to become the new trash piles in our streets. Lets go out
and fix them (yeah, the map is quite/too full of them).

I would love to see your energy going into a tool to bring OSM notes and
fixmes together and making mappers to get them into their

Best regards

Michael

--
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)


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

signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Tom Pfeifer
On 03.07.2018 01:23, Michael Reichert wrote:
> There are 177,152 FIXME and 1,216,043 fixme according to Taginfo. I did
> not have a closer look on the average age of FIXMEs and fixmes.
>
> What's the benefit in this mechanical edit? It just sets the
> last_modified attribute to a recent date and data consumers, mappers and
> QA tools get the impression that the object is not old.

This was my first thought as well.

As for mapping, I prefer to see the name of the last editor who changed content,
and not the name of the last bot who just lowercased a key.
In that case I need to dig into the history which is extra work for me.

The proposed edit does not improve data quality a single bit.

Fixmes are to be solved, not to be renamed.

Tom

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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Jason Remillard
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3
Hi,

I support this edit.

This spring, I was working on changeset validation code and I was quite surprised to find that FIXME (an invalid key) was so prevalent in the database. I had to collect a bunch of extra validation changesets with the FIXME tag present to train the neural network that an all-caps key is bad unless it is FIXME. As a data consumer, the existence of the tag caused me many hours of extra work.

Removing the FIXME tag reduces the learning curve for map editors. Going forward, nobody needs to wonder if FIXME= or fixme= is correct.

All of the editors have single-click access to the full history of the object, changes to the last modified time or last modified user isn't that big a deal for experienced editors.

Jason

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 1:42 PM, Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]> wrote:
fixme tag is a standard way to mark fixmes.
Editors wishing to finish mapping in their area would (directly or
indirectly, for example using JOSM) look through objects tagged with
fixme tags.

FIXME tag is an unexpected way to mark fixmes, retagging this duplicate to
fixme key would improve tagging without any information loss.

It would make development of QA tools easier as authors would not need to
discover and implement support for this duplicated key.

Between X and Y objects are expected to be edited. See
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/FIXME#map for a
geographic distribution.

Changeset would be split into small areas to avoid continent-sized
bounding boxes. As this tag may be on extremely large objects (for example relations representing long routes) it may be unavoidable to make some edits with very large bounding boxes.

For documentation page see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/moving_FIXME_to_fixme
For documentation of my previous proposals (including both proposals
that failed to be approved and approved ones) see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account

Please comment - especially if there are any problems with this idea.
Please also comment if you support this edit, in case of no response
at all edit will not be made as there would be no evidence that
this idea is supported.

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



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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Yves-2
In reply to this post by Tom Pfeifer
I second Tom and Mikael, maybe a kind of rédaction to keep the date could be done? Not sure it's worth the effort though.
Yves
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Mateusz Konieczny-3
In reply to this post by Michael Reichert-3



3. Lipiec 2018 01:23 od [hidden email]:

What's the benefit in this mechanical edit? It just sets the
last_modified attribute to a recent date and data consumers, mappers and
QA tools get the impression that the object is not old.


- removes common duplicate confusing people

- removes common duplicate requiring special support in anything processing fixme tags

 

If you want to search for uses of FIXME, use the OSM Inspector.


Now that I know about existence of FIXME tag I can add support for it in my tools

at 1% of cost of going through mechanical edit.


The entire point is not to support may particular usecase, the point is to save

people in future from spending time on handling tag duplication.


Also, OSM Inspector anyway is not useful at all for offline tag listing on map

during survey, on a phone (my particular usecase).


Fixmes tend to become the new trash piles in our streets. Lets go out
and fix them (yeah, the map is quite/too full of them).


That is exactly what I was doing when I discovered that FIXME tag exists.



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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Ed Loach-2
Mateusz wrote:

> Also, OSM Inspector anyway is not useful at all for offline tag listing on map
> during survey, on a phone (my particular usecase).

Funnily enough I've added FIXME tags when out surveying with my phone (Vespucci). FIXME pre-dates the fixme wiki proposal (if you dig out the proposal you'll see a discussion on the talk page about FIXME vs fixme when FIXME was still in the majority if you excluded an import which added 140,000 fixme entries) - indeed I didn’t even know there was a wiki proposal. The discussion on that wiki talk page decided it didn’t really matter about the case if I recall rightly, or this change would have been done years ago. If the edit does go ahead then I'll try and remember to use fixme, though perhaps notes make more sense than hiding things in tags and instead of changing case the proposal should be to extract the FIXME's to notes to increase their visibility.

Ed


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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Frederik Ramm
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3
Hi,

On 02.07.2018 19:42, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> It would make development of QA tools easier as authors would not need to
> discover and implement support for this duplicated key.

I think the downsides of such a large mechanical edit far outweigh the
advantages.

Don't forget that new FIXMEs will continue to appear all the time.

Software should be able to deal with both.

Bye
Frederik

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

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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Maarten Deen
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3
On 2018-07-03 09:49, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:

> Now that I know about existence of FIXME tag I can add support for it
> in my tools at 1% of cost of going through mechanical edit.
>
> The entire point is not to support may particular usecase, the point
> is to save people in future from spending time on handling tag
> duplication.

What will prevent users from adding FIXME tags in the future? Do you
propose to redo this mechanical edit periodically? What happens to the
tools that read FIXME tags in the meanwhile?

I can't find anything on case for the key, but general concensus is that
it should be in lowercase (which makes sense), but IMHO tools should be
liberal in what they accept as input, so I would always search case
insensitive if I were to look for something.

IMHO before we do this edit (which in my eyes should be unneccessary),
we should have concensus on the case of the FIXME tag in OSM (and indeed
any tag) and have all editors adehere to that standard. I just tried,
JOSM hapilly accept fixme and FIXME on the same node.
This edit has not much use when that remains the case.

Regards,
Maarten

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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

_ dikkeknodel
In reply to this post by Frederik Ramm

Ed wrote:

 

> though perhaps notes make more sense than hiding things in tags and instead of changing case the proposal should be to extract the FIXME's to notes to increase their visibility.

For me notes are often much less informative than fixme tags. Because the fixme tag is on the entity requiring fix, there is no discussion required about what entity is meant. Also, when the entity requiring fix is re-aligned by some mapper without handling the note, the descrepancy between the entity and the note make become bigger.

 

For me notes and fixmes are different things.

fixme is used between fellow mappers to indicate missing or incorrect data, like the endnode of a highway with fixme=continue is very clear that it requires a survey on where the highway goes

notes can be used by anybody on openstreetmap.org, and typically require more info.

 

Cheers,

dikkeknodel


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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

lsces
In reply to this post by Frederik Ramm
On 03/07/18 09:28, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> On 02.07.2018 19:42, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>> It would make development of QA tools easier as authors would not need to
>> discover and implement support for this duplicated key.
> I think the downsides of such a large mechanical edit far outweigh the
> advantages.
>
> Don't forget that new FIXMEs will continue to appear all the time.
>
> Software should be able to deal with both.

I'm with you on this Frederik. The correct fix for a 'FIXME' tag is to
deal with it or remove it completely if no longer valid, and adding
extra change events to 'fixme' only gets in the way of that.

IF there is a general consensus that some tags are no longer acceptable,
then the first step is to fix the API to prevent their use? Once the
source of the problem is eliminated THEN address the historic data.

Is there any case for not enforcing lowercase only tags? The fact that
'FIXME' and 'fixme' can exist on the same node just seems wrong in ANY case?

--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Mateusz Konieczny-3
In reply to this post by Maarten Deen
3. Lipiec 2018 10:36 od [hidden email]:

What will prevent users from adding FIXME tags in the future?


Nothing, users may add any tags. It is impossible to change that by edits.

 

What happens to the tools that read FIXME tags in the meanwhile?


Tools that process both FIXME and fixme will be unaffected.

Tools that process solely FIXME are broken already.


I just tried, JOSM hapilly accept fixme and FIXME on the same node.
This edit has not much use when that remains the case.


JOSM allows to add any tags. For example one may add dhhs=487847dhh tag using JOSM.


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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Maarten Deen
On 2018-07-03 11:23, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> 3. Lipiec 2018 10:36 od [hidden email]:
>
>> What will prevent users from adding FIXME tags in the future?
>
> Nothing, users may add any tags. It is impossible to change that by
> edits.

Then the proposed mechanical edit is useless. It will have to be
repeated periodically, and I don't think that should be how we do QC for
this problem.
If this is a problem, it needs to be fixed at the root (change the API
to accept lowercase keys only or change every key to lowercase on
upload) and then corrected (this proposed mechanical edit).

Regards,
Maarten

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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Mateusz Konieczny-3
3. Lipiec 2018 11:38 od [hidden email]:

On 2018-07-03 11:23, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
3. Lipiec 2018 10:36 od [hidden email]:
What will prevent users from adding FIXME tags in the future?

Nothing, users may add any tags. It is impossible to change that by
edits.

Then the proposed mechanical edit is useless.


For start, see http://taghistory.raifer.tech - FIXME tag usage is not growing at this moment.


It was quickly growing up to 2013, slowed later and and since 2017 usage is decreasing.


Also, going by that logic any improvements or changes are useless as may need to be repeated

in a future.


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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Tom Pfeifer
In reply to this post by Jason Remillard
On 03.07.2018 04:33, Jason Remillard wrote:> ... and I was quite surprised to find that FIXME> (an
invalid key) was so prevalent in the database.
Who declared the uppercase version invalid? Where is the discussion to deprecate it?

The English fixme wiki page still declares "Alternate forms include FIXME=*"

> Removing the FIXME tag reduces the learning curve for map editors.

What specific skill is to be learned here?

 > All of the editors have single-click access to the full history of the object, changes to the
last modified time or last modified user isn't that big a deal for experienced editors.

To check the object history is something the new user learns later, so first she sees an object
touched recently by an automated tool, and trusts its correctness.

On 03.07.2018 06:12, Yves wrote:
 > I second Tom and Mikael, maybe a kind of rédaction to keep the date could be done? Not sure it's
 > worth the effort though.

Thanks, but the effort would be even larger than a bot edit; and I agree with you and Fred that its
not worth it.

On 03.07.2018 09:49, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
 > - removes common duplicate confusing people

I'm getting the impression that we cannot find agreements on more important confusions (grass and
forest landuse/landcover for example), so we start looking at such decorative issues?

On 03.07.2018 10:12, Ed Loach wrote:
 > ... FIXME pre-dates the fixme wiki proposal (if you dig out the proposal you'll see a discussion
on the talk page about FIXME vs fixme when FIXME was still in the majority if you excluded an import
which added 140,000 fixme entries) - indeed I didn’t even know there was a wiki proposal. The
discussion on that wiki talk page decided it didn’t really matter about the case if I recall
rightly, or this change would have been done years ago.

Ed, your analysis is correct, and probably people used the 'shouting' uppercase for FIXME so it
jumps into the eye of the next editor more easily.

On 03.07.2018 10:56, Lester Caine wrote:
 > On 03/07/18 09:28, Frederik Ramm wrote:
 >> Don't forget that new FIXMEs will continue to appear all the time.
 >> Software should be able to deal with both.
 >
 > I'm with you on this Frederik. The correct fix for a 'FIXME' tag is to deal with it or remove it
 > completely if no longer valid, and adding extra change events to 'fixme' only gets in the way of
that.

Fully agree. As the wiki page says: "This is not a tag for robots nor for any automated edits" -
that should apply to both, the problem the individual fixme/FIXME marks, and the tag itself.

tom


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

Re: proposed mechanical edit - moving FIXME=* to fixme=*

Tom Pfeifer
In reply to this post by Mateusz Konieczny-3
On 03.07.2018 11:48, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> see http://taghistory.raifer.tech
> It [FIXME] was quickly growing up to 2013, slowed later and and since 2017 usage is decreasing.

Fine, so let it die peacefully.

Interestingly, 'FIXME' behaves more naturally, while 'fixme' shows a lot of import activities.
Quite visible if you add first 'FIXME' than 'fixme' to http://taghistory.raifer.tech/, so you see
the latter in the zoom for the former. (hit 'reset zoom' to change the ceiling then).

tom

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
123