Use (or at least offer) lifecycle prefix instead of deleting POIs

[dnet]

As it can be seen below, the editor view contains a red button ("Does Not Exist" on English locale) that makes it possible to delete the currently edited object.

The conditional if clause on line 587 also includes a brown/orange button ("Mark Defunct" / "Mark Active" on English locale) based on the current state – this already uses lifecycle prefix disused, however

• because of the if mentioned above, this is only available for amenities, but not for things on the micromapping tab (e.g., benches, trash cans/waste bins), and
• the wording makes people use the red button ("Does Not Exist") if they do not see the object at all, deleting the POI.

As I described this in a similar issue I just opened on StreetComplete, this leads to armchair mappers re-adding the removed POI based on outdated street-level imagery such as Panoramax.

The solution would be extending the available options regarding the lifecycle prefix, allowing users to use demolished or removed for such objects instead of deleting them from OSM.

[deevroman]

Can just rename "Does Not Exist" to "Delete"?

[dnet]

Can just rename "Does Not Exist" to "Delete"?

That would definitely be a great first step, as a low-hanging fruit. :)

A more complete solution would aid both kinds of editors/users:

• those who know the distinction between deletion and lifecycle prefix (when/why each should be used) would have the option to choose
• those who don't (yet) know could be educated and helped to pick the right one that matches their use-case

One solution could be that a button with the text Does Not Exist stays and sets removed or demolished, while as you mentioned, a new button with the text Delete keeps the current implementation – latter could show a confirmation dialog explaining that it should be used if there is little chance that anyone would ever re-create the POI.

[tordans]

FYI iD has a new UI in the works that will allow to change the lifecycle for an object openstreetmap/iD#10844
There is some code in there to which lifecycle method to use when. And also some discussion on how that might become something that is shared between editors.

[mnalis]

TL;DR: probably not a good idea, unless extra care is taken to make sure it would only be used rarely

---

Can just rename "Does Not Exist" to "Delete"?

Probably this solution is most that could be done; although IMHO it is good enough as it is (it describes its current state of the tree/bench/etc in real life, instead of describing the action to be taken by the mapper)

If we really wanted to, we could perhaps have an advanced preference "offer lifecycle-prefix for microtagging", which, if enabled, would ask if you want to delete or just add certain lifecycle prefix (with most prominent option being Delete) when Does not exist is pressed.

But that would be mostly useful of buildings mode and amenities mode (where there are already Demolished / Mark Defunct which are good enough) and not so much in Micromapping mode. ¹

Because, as noted in that linked StreetComplete issue, that adding demolished:amenity=bicycle_parking or removed:amenity=bench is not really a good idea to be used on EVERYTHING removed, as it would mark the map with tons on nonexisting stuff. In 99% of the cases you really want to just delete the element.

Only in remaining 1% does it make sense to add e.g. removed: prefix (i.e. if there is high chance that the element would be added back by non-surveys, e.g. if they are being re-added periodically by some importer script or people seeing it on latest aerial maps).

Thus, even if such feature were added, that 1% should be made extra hard so most users would prefer just deleting the element, e.g. ask extra confirmation "Are you really sure you want to mark it as removed instead of just removing it?" (or even requiring the mapper to type the text for note=* with explanation why the feature was not completely removed, and when it should be fully removed -- but that last one would be probably adding too much friction).

Footnotes

1. as we usually won't tag ruins:natural=tree but natural=tree_stump instead, and if it is completely removed together with a stump, we should usually just remove it instead of marking it as removed:natural=tree. As lifecycle prefix wiki states: "Once there is no real risk of remapping them by person thinking that this objects are still existing such elements should be deleted from OSM " ↩

[matkoniecz]

very similar request was rejected for StreetComplete, see streetcomplete/StreetComplete#6662

[matkoniecz]

As I described this in streetcomplete/StreetComplete#6662, this leads to armchair mappers re-adding the removed POI based on outdated street-level imagery such as Panoramax.

is there even a single known case of Panoramax-based adding of no longer existing features, that were previously deleted by ED mappers?

is leaving debris trail of lifecycled no longer existing objects that will be troublesome and obnoxious to delete (we already have a lot of such unwanted garbage that should have been deleted but is not) really better than educating overeager remote mappers?