Talk:Change rollback

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Rollback-Tool Brainstorming

Yes, I would like to see a revert function available to which I could give a changeset to and it would revert all the changes made to the database within that changeset. It must flag the changes as being made by me and being made using that tool (I must take responsibility for the decision to revert and the tool must also be identified as it has some responsibility for the quality of the revert). Would the tool be something that ran on my computer? Possibly. Peter Miller

I'd like to have a web-interface as this would make interaction with others much more easy. Also the example [1] shows the great ::power of the crowd and I'd like to make as much use of this as possible. And finally I'm a Web-Developer :) Mazdermind 21:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I'd like this as standalone program or plugin for JOSM instead --Bilbo 22:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

A good tool will need to be able to do this even when some changes have been made on top of the changeset and possibly highlight a few issues that cannot be reverted because of conflicts. Peter Miller

In cases where it's unable to solve a conflict automatically it should give logical proposals but also allow completely free edits on all nodes (including none-conflicting) Mazdermind 21:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

A good might be able to review all the changes made by a particular user over a period of time and list the status of the features before and after to assess what the user is doing and if there is any sense to it or what. It should be possible to revert multiple changesets by one user in this way. Peter Miller

It should also show which changes already have been reverted to show how others think about them. Mazdermind 21:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

A good tool should allow reverting only a part of a changeset while keeping the rest untouched (e.g. if you just know about a certain area the changeset covers) Mazdermind 21:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

The changeset to revert contains some elements, so the tool can select which part of the changeset to revert (for example by defining a bounding box) --Bilbo 22:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

A good tool should visualize the changesets in one big map and/or one mini-map per object, so show what is done. If using real slippymaps with element-overlays is too much trouble, we could use pictographs to show what a particular action will do. Mazdermind 08:50, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

A good tool should do some fuzzy logic to find indirect conflicts (see this Mail for some samples) Mazdermind 08:50, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism Monitor Brainstorming

A good tool might be able to monitor the minutely diffs and identify unlikely behaviour, such as someone randomly changing names for features that have been stable for some time, or moving nodes around that have been stable for some time. This is just a warning, not a definite problem and would need to be assessed. Peter Miller

This tool could be used not only to check for vandalism, but also to check for newbie mistakes. In area where I map I've not yet encountered any vandalism, but often newbies make many mistakes (while their contribution is positive, their mistakes still needs fixing), like: forgetting to tag bridges, railroad crossings, not joining crossing streets with a node, often they misread something in "mapping features" and then they put weird stuff in the tags, etc ... JOSM in hands of inexperienced is quite prone to accidentally moving entire way away (if you intend to select an area) and accidentally connecting two unrelated ways with a common node (you just draw and not realize what "mess" you are doing) - and other editors are probably probably prone to their specific mistakes, so we need to watch for these too.
The monitor can watch for such changes, then I can correct them and tell the newbies what they have done bad and what they can do better next time. --Bilbo 23:19, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

A good tool might be able to monitor the minutely diffs and check names against a 'swear list' to check for unlikely street names and locality names etc. Not all rude names are incorrect as the book 'rude Britain' can testify but it is worth checking.[1] The camp sites at Burning Man have some very offensive names as well. Peter Miller

A good tool might be able to import a 'white list' of trusted editors and then focus the attention on unknown contributors in the minutely diffs feed. There would need to be a way for trusted users to give trusted status to others or challenge it and share lists. Peter Miller

A good tool might spot users breaking coastline or motorways or railway lines or administrative boundaries or other very established features and highlight this for review. Peter Miller

This tool should be configurable so that one can monitor only a part of the world that one is interested in, or only feature types that one is interested in, for example railways in Europe, or everything within a bounding box. Peter Miller

A good tool might be able to identify a revert war by spotting tags for features that are flipping backwards and forwards frequently or tags that get created and deleted. Basically any feature that returns to a recent state again a number of times in a short period. Peter Miller

Finding deleted data

I am wondering if we should give some hints on someone can actually find nodes and ways that have been deleted a while ago. Who did it comes to my mind, but is there anything else? --Bigbug21 (talk) 12:33, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

See my edit of today: "maybe this paragraph should be moved into an own page/section together with the following link". I am just not sure if it should be a section or an own page. Somehow it is also related/crossing Quality_assurance#Monitoring_Tools … but I would call finding deleted data "discovery" not "monitoring". --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 16:37, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Remove part about "Potlatch 1"

IMO Potlatch 1 does not work anymore. It did not for me yesterday. Also it is too hard to install Flash and "hack" the URL to get to the editor itself. Can we remove this section? (unsigned comment left by Tordans) 09:55, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Potlatch 1 still works for me - it makes sense to leave it in as it's currently the only way to get at that functionality. Also if it's too hard for people to edit a URL then I despair for humanity as a whole :) --SomeoneElse (talk) 14:49, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Online reverter

Adavidson (talk) 10:50, 14 May 2018 (UTC)