Differentiate between quests to add new data and checking existing data

[Strubbl]

Use case
If i survey an area with a lot of shops, it would be nice, if i can differentiate whether e.g. the opening hours need to be added because they do not exists or if i shall check the entered ones if they are still the same. This way i could e.g. map for completeness first and maintain existing data second.

This would be valid for all recurring quests: surface, bicycle lanes, opening hours, …

Proposed Solution
Show a different quests icon for recurring quests, e.g. use the current icon, but add a small checkmark to it. Bonus would be if those quests would be a separate quest so that i can prioritize them.

Do you understand what i mean?

[westnordost]

I know what you mean and this has been discussed before. It will not be done.

There is little reason to differenciate between old information and missing information for the user. In terms of data value, verifying existing data is as much valueable or more than adding new data (because the value of wrong data or potentially wrong data is negative). If there are not enough contributors to maintain (volatile) data, then it is better to not record it in the first place.

Maintaining data is something no user should be able to (completely) opt out, it is part of it and thus it is an inseparable part of contributing at OpenStreetMap.

[matkoniecz]

Note that it is case of design decision where each solution has negatives/positives.

And "make option for that and support both" has also very serious downsides.

Changing that would likely cause different problems and be very time consuming to implement, retest and support.

[Strubbl]

In terms of data value, verifying existing data is as much valueable or more than adding new data

Of course not. I did not say this. But for me, as a mapper, it is a difference in time used for solving quests.

Sorry, i did not find any issue with the search, where this has already been discussed. Otherwise i would not have opened another issue for this.

Changing that would likely cause different problems and be very time consuming to implement, retest and support.

I do not requests a config option here, it would increase the number of quests.

[Strubbl]

(Sorry, i hit crtl+enter accidently for the previous comment.)

E.g. for opening hours i am clicking the quest and if i have to add 3 or 4 lines of opening hours instead of controlling the currently mapped one and maybe only correct one line, i just skip the quest (due to time reasons when i am not alone while mapping). Since the app is not very performant when opening the quest (due to zooming and showing the dialog being slow) i would love to have this info before clicking the quest.
To exaggerate, just imagine all quests (because all the quests are important and prio one) would have the same icon and i have to open it in order to see what shall be done.

In the end, this is a design decision and i have to accept this. Like the design decision for the lit quest.

From my mapping point of view the lit issue (map only in darkness) and this issue try to predetermine how i shall map. This just does not feel good for me. I am sorry.

[westnordost]

Hm, you have a point in that some resurvey-quests can be much faster than the enter-new-quests version. I guess especially, or only, opening hours.

However, to somehow distinguish resurvey and enter-new would make the definition of quests more complex, not to mention it would involve a big refactor for all quests that can currently be re-surveyed. It would really be a lot of work, believe me, I just mentally went through all the steps that would be necessary for this. Even if we had the same opinion on the usefulness of such a feature, I'd probably still say that it is not worth the effort and added complexity alone.

And thinking about this, only really the opening hours quest has a potential for very different times to solve a resurvey and to solve a enter-new quest. And that not even reliably: Often enough, the shop does not exist anymore or the opening hours indeed did change, making it longer to answer than a simple "yes". You can not see this beforehand. At the point where you determined that it takes indeed longer to answer, you'll already have somewhat committed to it, as you searched for an opening hours plate and read the times on that plate (or failed to find it).
And on recording new hours, it is also often the case that the particular shop has no opening hours plate at all, making it fast to answer as well.
So the addition of a ✔️-icon would be less useful than you think it is.

Regarding the lit quest, I am strongly playing with the thought to completely remove this feature again, IIRC the issue is still open somewhere. However, I am not getting anything done right now. There is currently a interminable flood of issues (and PRs), I am doing little more than triaging, answering, reviewing, merging, fixing and releasing new versions right now, even though I am practically working full-time on this project. Needless to say that I am of course not getting paid for this work but I hope this non-sustainable situation will end after October.
I mean, just look at this, the complete last page of the issue tracker are all tickets that have been opened during the last 30 days! And those are just the still open ones. It looks like over 120 tickets have been closed in the last 30 days and still open are 55 tickets that have been opened in the last 30 days. So that's in average almost 6 tickets per day. No wonder why I don't get anything done.

[Strubbl]

Thank you very much for explaining the situation. I am really sorry for adding another issue to the list.

[matkoniecz]

There is currently a interminable flood of issues (and PRs), I am doing little more than triaging, answering, reviewing, merging, fixing and releasing new versions right now, even though I am practically working full-time on this project. Needless to say that I am of course not getting paid for this work but I hope this non-sustainable situation will end after October.

Should I open lower number of PRs (focus more on bigger issues?) or commit directly without PRs more often?

Or maybe close issues on more own? For example here I planned to post my comment and keep it open, maybe I should WONTFIX such cases? Here you anyway commented earlier, but I am asking for future.

[westnordost]

@matkoniecz thanks for the suggestion, I appreciate it. Let me think...

I replied in #3450

[mnalis]

@Strubbl one of the workarounds could be to have separate quest preset used when you have little time, and a separate quest preset used when you have more time, and include opening_hours (and other time-consuming quests) only in the latter.

(ref for history see for example #2174, #1998)