but what should we do with those among us who misunderstand the meaning of a warning, in particular when that’s about incomplete information? for example …
- a highway and a waterway crossing each other, without specifying ford/culvert/bridge? if the original mapper didn’t see it in the picture, they left it unspecified and the QA tool would highlight it for a local mapper. as remote mappers, I think we should simply leave it standing as a warning, however annoying all these warnings in our map.
- an office=government, without government=*. I’ve seen instances of people deleting the office=government, just because they didn’t like the osmose flag in their area.
- making up values just to fill in a missing tag.
- false positives.
- changes in agreed tagging, which didn’t make it yet in the QA.
- programming mistakes in the QA.
reducing coloured flags on any QA is a good thing. or isn’t it?
7 posts - 6 participants
Ce sujet de discussion accompagne la publication sur https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/the-double-cutting-knife-of-quality-assurance/7297