Which are the initial categories we want to enable? Which communities would they support?

nukeador · 2022-03-18T11:41:25.091Z

5 posts were split to a new topic: Enabling mailing list mode

Martin_Borsje · 2022-03-17T14:38:35.027Z

The set up of the current forum is not that bad; at least national sub-forums where users can interact in their native language on mostly local topics I prefer a lot.
Some topical fora as cycling, building, geology/geography (English language?) I think okay.
Closed sub-fora for specialist topics (e.g. the Dutch building import forum group); possibly even hidden to non-members I appreciate.

kubahahaha · 2022-03-17T23:05:35.914Z

Communities category says:

Here we host different OSM country communities

What about communities like public-transport folks, or JOSM? They will be in diffrent category?

nukeador · 2022-03-18T10:47:16.175Z

Hi @kubahahaha I’m moving your question under the existing topic talking about categories.

kubahahaha:

What about communities like public-transport folks, or JOSM? They will be in diffrent category?

Yes, those can be different categories, it’s up to the community to decide which themes should have their own category. Usually it’s advised to create a separate category when there are a decent amount of topic traffic about a specific theme.

One option could be to have a “General discussion” category and use tags there, if we see a high amount of topics with a specific tag, then create a category for them. This way we avoid having categories with low or no traffic.

What do you think?

Martin_Borsje · 2022-03-18T16:57:18.689Z

Editors (as JOSM) definitely need a separate sub-forum!

Tordanik · 2022-03-18T17:06:21.907Z

Could you explain the benefits compared to using tags for this use case? Intuitively, it seems preferable to tag a question about editing cycle routes with JOSM as josm+cycling+relations instead of having to choose between the cycling and JOSM sub-forum.

Anecdotally, the “editors” sub-forum on forum.osm.org doesn’t work that well and many questions related to editors are being asked elsewhere.

Mateusz_Konieczny · 2022-03-18T19:00:51.315Z

things like “Dutch building import forum group” should not be hidden

hiding should be done only if absolutely needed (moderation handling for example)

nukeador · 2022-03-19T19:50:28.461Z

4 posts were split to a new topic: An off-topic space/category

chris_debian · 2022-03-20T18:33:17.957Z

Hi, all.

Just found my way here, after seeing a mention in the weeklyOSM roundup.

Trying to think of something that will bring value to underrepresented groups. In the UK, for example, this would be covered by the Equality Act 2010. As a starter, would it be possible to have an area where matters could be discussed, regarding the representation of those with Disabilities?

EA2010- Easy read- Easy Read: The Equality Act - making equality real - GOV.UK

So, perhaps have an area named something like ‘Diversity and Inclusion’, potentially with more specialist sub-areas?

The 9 Protected Characteristics:

Age
Disability
Gender reassignment
Marriage or civil partnership
Pregnancy and maternity
Race
Religion or belief
Sex
Sexual orientation

Most of the list above may seem irrelevant to traditional mappers, but if we want to innovate, it would be good to have an area for matters to be discussed, as they will potentially turn in to ‘deliverables’.

Many thanks,

Chris
chris_debian
2E0FRU

bVites · 2022-03-21T10:31:41.781Z

I don’t think we want to be over-specific, at risk of creating inactive categories. Maybe an umbrella “accessibility” category would be better, and more relevant to OSM?

chris_debian · 2022-03-21T10:51:18.411Z

@bVites Completely agree

Chris

nukeador · 2022-03-21T15:57:28.406Z

In paralel with this discussion, I’ve put together a proposal about the process and requirements for requesting new categories, looking for your input and feedback

New categories requirements and process This Site Feedback

This proposal tries to unify a process for requesting and approving new categories on these forums. Please, we want to read your input in the comments below! These forums are intended to be a safe and open space for open mapping communities and contributors and we want people to have the chance to have a space here. What are we trying to solve: Define a process on how to request a new category. Understand when a new category is needed vs other options (i.e using tags). Ensure new categories…

Maybe we want to use this a way to see how many people request a category here initially and have an organic growth? I think seeing who and why people are requesting categories can inform this discussion.

Petya_Kangalova · 2022-03-22T16:21:27.748Z

To the two points on tech/software subgroups and HOT, I would see these as possible tags like “tech” and “humanitarian” that can be added to specific topics, as opposed to creating categories. Then as the community grows we can see if tags for specific tools/software are helpful. Definitely starting with less categories and tags will be best in my opinion.

Petya_Kangalova · 2022-03-22T16:25:20.427Z

Maybe we want to use this a way to see how many people request a category here initially and have an organic growth? I think seeing who and why people are requesting categories can inform this discussion.

I think this is a very sensible suggestion! Giving people the chance to suggest categories and following more of an organic growth, following the needs of the communities.

nukeador · 2022-03-27T18:57:57.210Z

Seeing some of the initial topics happening over #communities I see two types:

Conversations about a specific country-community
General conversations/topics about OSM

I wonder if we might want to see some general OSM conversations happening at the parent category, similar to the conversations that usually take place at osm-talk, or if we want to consider having a “General/Talk” category just for that.

Alternatively we can observe dynamics and decide afterwards. I guess once we agree on the process to request new categories, we’ll see more traffic coming over here.

Mateusz_Konieczny · 2022-04-01T12:47:21.044Z

Is there some reason to not enable “Tagging” section?

(I considered posting here about my RFC for proposal but there is no good place for this)

nukeador · 2022-04-01T12:49:54.555Z

Mateusz_Konieczny:

Is there some reason to not enable “Tagging” section?

We are still in the discussion phase, that’s why we have only enabled Help and support and this category, as soon as we get to some agreements, people will be able to follow a process to request a category here. I suspect that Tagging might be one of them

markkerrigan · 2022-04-01T20:40:17.752Z

I think this is the right place for my comments. I come from participating a lot in the OSM US Slack, where there are a lot of topical channels.

I think tagging is good, but only if people remember to use the tags or if other people can tag the topic (I’m not sure if this feature is restricted only to moderators or not / how such privileges would be granted.)

So yes it would be really nice to see some of the more frequently discussed topics receive their own dedicated Category in Discourse. For example, General → Bicycles, or some other scheme, which makes it easier to subscribe to all topics related to a particular subject area one might be interested in.

spaanse · 2022-04-03T17:13:57.621Z

I think it might be convenient to set the maximum nesting to 3, See meta.discourse.org.
Then you can have
Local chapter / The Netherlands / BAG import requests
This is currently a megathread on the old forum
Larger countries could use the second level for it’s states:
Local chapter / Germany / Nordrhein-Westphalia
And if necessary this becomes a second-level category with subthreads
Local chapter / Germany - Nordrhein-Westphalia / ...
Local chapter / USA - California / ...

Note: devs advice against more than two levels. I have never tried it, but it could be more buggy than the default two-levels. That is also why the option is hidden.

Tordanik · 2022-04-04T17:03:13.462Z

spaanse:

I think it might be convenient to set the maximum nesting to 3, See meta.discourse.org .

That’s a very interesting option that opens up additional possibilities for structuring our category hierarchy, thank you for sharing this discovery!

I think this would even address the concern expressed by @cquest that very active local communities or chapters would not fit in a global forum – at least based on nesting depth.