Mechanical Edits/Mateusz Konieczny - bot account/moving building=building to building=yes
Page content created as advised on Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct#Document_and_discuss_your_plans.
Who
I, Mateusz Konieczny using my bot account
contact
message via OSM I will respond also to PMs to the bot account. In both cases I will be notified about incoming PMs via email and notifications in OSM editors.
What
Retagging building=building to building=yes.
Why
building=yes is a standard way to mark building without specifying its type. Editors wishing to specify building type would (directly or indirectly, for example using StreetComplete) look through buildings tagged as building=yes.
building=building is an unexpected way to mark building without specifying its type and therefore retagging this duplicate to building=yes would improve tagging without any information loss.
It would also (as an useful byproduct) remove this tag from popular values at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/building#values and ensure that it will not become proposed as a valid value by an iD editor (at this moment threshold for building value is 14514 uses).
Direct reason
During work on https://github.com/westnordost/StreetComplete/pull/1092 I was reviewing top taginfo values for building key ( https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/building#values ) and I spotted this entry that should be easy to fix using a mechanical edit.
Numbers
Between 4000 and 5000 objects are expected to be edited. See https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=building#map for a geographic distribution.
How
building=building tag would be replaced by building=yes
An example:
state before a mechanical edit:
state after a mechanical edit:
Changeset would be described and tagged with tags that mark it as automatic, provide link to discussion approving edit, link repository with source code etc. It would include at least
- automatic=yes
- bot=yes
- created_by=osmapi/1.0.2
- discussion_before_edits=https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2018-June/080805.html
- source_code=link to a github repository
Changeset would be split into small areas to avoid continent-sized bounding boxes. As this tag is on buildings it is not expected that any object will force bounding box to be extremely large.
Edits would be generated by an osmapi based program.
Discussion
talk mail list - https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2018-June/080805.html
Mailing list - initial post
title
proposed mechanical edit - moving building=building to building=yes
text
building=yes is a standard way to mark building without specifying its type. Editors wishing to specify building type would (directly or indirectly, for example using StreetComplete) look through buildings tagged as building=yes.
building=building is an unexpected way to mark building without specifying its type and therefore retagging this duplicate to building=yes would improve tagging without any information loss.
It would also (as an useful byproduct) remove this tag from popular values at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/building#values and ensure that it will not become proposed as a valid value by an iD editor (at this moment threshold for building value is 14514 uses).
Between 4000 and 5000 objects are expected to be edited. See https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/building=building#map for a geographic distribution.
Changeset would be split into small areas to avoid continent-sized bounding boxes. As this tag is on buildings it is not expected that any object will force bounding box to be extremely large.
For documentation page see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/moving_building%3Dbuilding_to_building%3Dyes 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
part that I forgot to include
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.
Repetition
Redoing this edit in the future would be treated as a new mechanical edit with a new approval process.
Opt-out
Please comment in the discussion thread (see #Discussion).