Thanks for pointing out the issues with my suggestion. Maybe POI is a difficult thing to start with.
Maybe business slots/buildings/routes is a better start?
I was thinking that we create an entity and link the current osm element to that entity.
E.g. I’m sitting in a big mall called Avion. There are a number of businesses in slots here. Every slot has a geometry or at least a point.
Slot Q1 links to a node with tags for coffee shop. Then the coffee shop closes and the node is emptied but kept.
Looking up Q1 I’ll see the history of elements it links to.
Going to the current one I find an empty node or abandoned:whatever
Then suddenly a new restaurant open in the same slot. Someone creates a new node for the restaurant unaware of the current empty node.
A third mapper knows that there is an entity pointing to an empty node but a new node without an entity link very close and investigates
The third mapper merges the nodes and now the newer node is deleted and the entity did not change.
Someone maps paths in the forest.
The city council decides to publish a new hiking path Hike1.
A wikidata volunteer imports the hiking path there and all the subsegments if any but cannot find an entity for the same in OSM
A second mapper comes along discovers that the open data in WD describes a route we don’t seem to have yet but all the paths are already there. They create a new relation for the route and create a new entity and link it to Wikidata.
A second wikidata volunteer comes along and discovers that the official name of the path has changed in the councils dataset and update Wikidata accordingly.
A bot operator on OSM looks for mismatches between linked entities in WD and OSM and propose to a user to fix the name in OSM.
Or perhaps when an entity has a WD link we don’t allow changes to the name on the element.
Does this sound like something we would want?
My suggestion is to have entity gatekeepers, someone with a good track record and has the trust of the local community can edit the entities in a specific area.
Deleting entities should be just as hard as it is in Wikidata.
Removing links between entity and osm element could be a 2 step process where two independent mappers must approve to make the change.
We could keep the entities in the current osm database or in a separate database.
A separate database like wikibase could possibly offer some benefits because it has a more powerful search language SPARQL. (I’m aware of sophox but it seems like a slap on that is not supported by the community and has no permanent and stable identifiers.)
This suggestion would provide:
- gatekeeping which would prevent name hijacking like the new york incident
- increased community involvement and cohesion
- better alignment with the web of linked open data
- possibility of tightening the integration between OSM and Wikidata. Together we are stronger than apart as we are now.
- possibility of running bots and validate entities. If Wikibase is chosen we have a ton of tools already available to help curate them effectively
- this increases complexity by adding another layer on top of OSM that we have to keep updated.