Hello,
Andy Townsend from OSM's Data Working Group here. We were cc:ed on http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/2022-April/011470.html and I've picked it up because I've been involved with a couple of related tickets elsewhere. Sorry about the out-of thread message; I've just joined this list to reply.
Mapbox have been creating these "projects" country by country at https://github.com/mapbox/mapping/issues and what's happened in each country has been broadly similar:
* Mapbox say that they will "resolve some issues" in that country, but don't say what they will fix or how they detected them. * The community in that country asks questions and gets only vague handwavy answers (e.g. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ie/2022-April/003016.html ). * The DWG then gets complaints about poor editing in that country and has to try and deal with the mappers concerned (see e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/del_account/blocks ). * The local community and/or the DWG then has to go through a "bucket and shovel" exercise to tidy up.
It makes no sense for Mapbox to take this approach in every country - it just creates extra work for everyone.
A much better approach would be what (eventually, after much badgering by the local community) happened in the UK. At https://github.com/mapbox/mapping/issues/387#issuecomment-1015316614 Mapbox published their list of "detected problems". What then happened in the UK was that the local communityfixed a large number of the issues (where there were genuine issues), and Mapbox's "mappers" didn't need to do anything - something of a win/win for everyone. I suspect that the Swiss OSM community is even better qualified than the UK one for that approach to work here too.
Looking outside of Switzerland, I'm now worried about where there hasn't been feedback on issues at https://github.com/mapbox/mapping/issues/ , but that's offitopic for this list.
Best Regards,
Andy (from the DWG)
(resending; original mail seems to have gone astray)