On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 9:59 PM, David Schmitt <da...@black.co.at> wrote:
> Hi Pierre, > > thank you for working on the Task Manager. It is an important piece of S/W > in- and outside of HOT. > > > On 2013-01-12 21:18, Pierre GIRAUD wrote: > >> The most important (new) things to notice are: >> - tiles can be accessed in a read-only mode, >> - with this in mind, tiles url (in the address bar) can be used to be >> shared to someone else. This might be useful to use a tile as reference >> in a discussion between mappers, >> > > That was something quite confusing about the task manager: you had to > login to do *anything*. I see on the dev server, that it's still a > requirement to login to browse the tasks. Is this really necessary? It > would be nicer if a login would be *only* necessary for "write" actions, > like locking/commenting ? You're right. Accessing a tile in read-only mode shouldn't require a login. I'm not sure a user should be able to access a job without being logged in. > > > - you need to explicitly lock the tile before working on it, >> > > So I can load and edit things without locking? To my engineering mind, > that sounds like a recipe for conflicts. I do not understand the use case. > Is there a workflow, where one needs to lock the task, but not load it into > an editor? That would be better served with "lock", "lock and load". > User may want to see it in an editor before they want to lock the tile to work on it. But I agree that conflicts may happen if users forget to lock the tile. On the first round I tried to display the "load in editor" buttons only after a lock, then decided to show them after selection. I can change it back easily if this sounds better. > > With my UX head on, "lock" also sounds very technical and forebidding. > Perhaps "Work on this" might be more inviting. Also in the history "Locked > by ..." does not describe what's happening. "X started to work" or "X > reserved the tile," might be more to the point. > Terminology is important. I agree. I'm happy to share ideas about UX. This is something I'm really sensitive to. In MapCraft they're using the following words: "take", "abandon", "reserved", "freed", "owner". I'm open to suggestions if others have any. Otherwise, I like the "Start to work on this", "X started to work on this". > > BTW, would it be possible to get a link/integration to one of those > whodidit services? Not everything that happens in a location is going > through the task manager. > > > https://www.google.com/search?**q=whodidit+openstreetmap<https://www.google.com/search?q=whodidit+openstreetmap> Can you elaborate how you see this integration? > > > - comments are now required when marking a task as done or >> (in)validating one, >> > > What should users put there? Thinking back to the tiles I did, I can only > remember one or two tiles where I felt a comment was required. Maybe a comment is not really required when marking a task as done. In my opinion, it's required when invalidating though. > > > - users have access to the tile change history. >> > > Which surely helps making comments more useful. But required? > > > I'm not sure how important the locking is when an advanced user wants to >> (in)validate the work done on a job. >> How about allowing validation without any lock. Or maybe we should >> rethink the validation process. >> Any thoughts? >> > > I think locking is important when the workflow "expects" the user to write > to the tile. > > Regarding the question of motivating people to re-take tiles for > validation, this too (like "lock") might be a problem of the used word: > "validation" sounds academic, important and of high responsibility. As a > arm-chair mapper with only very little knowledge of the task's background, > it is not my place to *validate* edits. Perhaps call it "second-pass"? That > could lower the barrier. Also, I'm of the opinion that the data-user (in > all of OSM) has to do her own validation to see whether the data is up to > the required accuracy for the intended usage. Again this is not something > someone from the wider community can do. Third, real validation can be done > in batches, where much more than a single tile is pre-loaded into josm, > background tiles are downloaded in batches and then quickly checked. This > would not require locking or loading through the TM, but only invalidating > or accepting the checked tiles. > > > Best Regards, David > > > > > > ______________________________**_________________ > HOT mailing list > HOT@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/hot<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot> > -- ------------------------------------------------------------- | Pierre GIRAUD -------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ HOT mailing list HOT@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot