(More) nagging/warning for empty changeset comment or source

[anonymous]

Please add (more) nagging when a changeset is to be uploaded without a comment or source attribute.

IMHO it is detrimental to OSM to have such changesets; one simple example (I am sure there are better ones): a changeset introducing lots of address data, no source given - has the address data been copied from a map which is considered a fallback/secondary source only and should thus be checked doing a survey or has the data actually been collected during a survey? Similarly, empty changeset comments are obviously not helpful for deciding if a changeset should be checked for quality assurance etc.

I'm aware of the fact that JOSM is aimed at advanced users which should probably know better and actually do provide changeset comment and source, but I still see lots of changesets with one or both of them missing (and also no source attribute on objects).

The nagging/warning dialog should probably explain that providing a meaningful comment and source is important for OSM and collaboration with other contributors (and contain a "Hide in future" checkbox).

If there already is such a dialog, it should probably be worded more strongly to really discourage leaving comment/source empty.

A more radical approach would be to refuse uploading if comment or source is missing (just like some version control systems abort comitting if no commit message is specified).

[simon04]

We already have (org.openstreetmap.josm.gui.io.UploadDialog.UploadAction#warnUploadComment)

"Your upload comment is <i>empty</i>, or <i>very short</i>.<br /><br />" +
"This is technically allowed, but please consider that many users who are<br />" + 
"watching changes in their area depend on meaningful changeset comments<br />" + 
"to understand what is going on!<br /><br />" + 
"If you spend a minute now to explain your change, you will make life<br />" + 
"easier for many other mappers."

… and … (org.openstreetmap.josm.gui.io.UploadDialog.UploadAction#warnUploadSource)

"You did not specify a source for your changes.<br />" +
"It is technically allowed, but this information helps<br />" + 
"other users to understand the origins of the data.<br /><br />" + 
"If you spend a minute now to explain your change, you will make life<br />" + 
"easier for many other mappers."

Which rewording would you suggest?

[anonymous]

First try (open to better suggestions of course):

For comment:

Your upload comment is empty, or very short.

You are strongly encouraged to add a meaningful comment; many users who are watching changes in their area depend on meaningful changeset comments to understand what is going on! Having a changeset comment for example makes it easier to recognize unintended changes and check your changes for plausibility.

So, please add a meaningful comment. Thank you.

For source:

You did not specify a source for your changes.

You are strongly encouraged to specify your source(s) (depending on the ones you used, it might even be mandatory).
Not having this information will make certain tasks like quality assurance unnecessarily difficult or even impossible, potentially requiring someone to revert or redo your work. Furthermore, source information helps other mappers (as well as yourself) decide if and how a feature should be edited during further mapping.

So, please specify your source(s). Thank you.

[simon04]

I'm okay with the new text … Any thoughts?

[Don-vip]

Milestone renamed