I do think that is idea definitely worth considering. Here are few examples, which should be relatively easy to do, and not too annoying to use on default osm.org map (which is the important bit: Yes I know we have QA tools, which can show that already. And even settings which default to off on main osm.org map! But they are not shown there by default, which means while I’m looking for a route or browsing the map I won’t see it - and that I’d need to have to make dedicated effort “OK I am bored so I am going to do some QA on the map”, and obviously I do that few orders of magnitude less times than just visiting osm.org map. I suspect that is also why e.g. StreetComplete become popular - as it shows that missing data by default and allows to easily add it).
So the idea is to show that some data is missing by default, but not make it too much standing-out (like QA tools need to do!)
-
show OSM Notes by default. If there are notes, it is clear indication that something is wrong or missing, and should be fixed. Often when I’m looking at something else, I see them and solve them if they are easy, and sometimes it even becomes a small mapping session even if it was not intended to be!)
-
subtly render streets without names (and without
noname=yes) differently. e.g. by having questionmarks like???stamped on them where name would go, or having them somewhat dimmed-out. That would not be too annoying (IMHO), and would indicate that such street misses name, and it should be fixed. (same???could be applied to water bodies without name etc). -
subtly render
highway=pathwithoutsurface=*(and individual access) tags differently (as they are missing critical detail and it is so generic that is bordering unusable; e.g. they may be urban asphalt cycleways or barely passable on foot grass wood trails). E.g. by making them somewhat dimmer, and/or having bigger distance between dots/dashes). Should not be too annoying, but would indicate to the map user that they might be able to contribute there.
(I’d love if people would try consider those suggestions on their own merit, and give their opinion of pro and contra - regardless if the discussion that triggered them might’ve been inspired by person that they don’t like or whatever).