Ditto here. That actually starts today, in like an hourŠso we'll see how we do.
Robert Banick | GIS Coordinator | International Services | Ì American Red Cross <http://www.redcross.org/> 2025 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20006 Tel 202-303-5017 | Cell 202-805-3679 | Skype robert.banick On 9/29/13 4:19 PM, "Kate Chapman" <k...@maploser.com> wrote: >Hi Robert/All, > >I wanted to mention we'll be using iD as well for the mapping begin >this week in Haiphong. It is currently the only OSM editor with decent >Vietnamese support. I'm a bit concerned about conflicts during our >training, but intend to use the Tasking Manager to try to avoid that. > >Best, > >-Kate > >On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Banick, Robert ><robert.ban...@redcross.org> wrote: >> Hi John et al., >> >> Thanks for the update! >> >> Acknowledged that imagery may have to wait a while. C'est la vie ‹ I >>know >> you all are kept quite busy as things are. >> >> Regarding conflict detection, I think myself, Kareem Ahmed, and the >> wonderful folks at the Kathmandu Living Labs will have a lot more >> constructive feedback after our training this week. We'll keep a >>running log >> of issues with all the softwares we're using and report back regarding >>the >> highest priority fixes for iD. Overall I agree that a full blown >>versioning >> editor is beyond scope for iD ‹ we just need something a little more >> user-friendly than the current error messages. >> >> Many thanks to Simon and the Operations Working Group for their GPX / >> Waypoints help! >> >> Cheers, >> Robert >> >> >> Robert Banick | GIS Coordinator | International Services | Ì American >>Red >> Cross >> >> 2025 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20006 >> >> Tel 202-303-5017 | Cell 202-805-3679 | Skype robert.banick >> >> >> From: John Firebaugh <john.fireba...@gmail.com> >> Date: Thursday, September 26, 2013 11:35 PM >> To: Robert Banick <robert.ban...@redcross.org> >> Cc: "kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com" <kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com>, >>william >> skora <skorasau...@gmail.com>, "hot@openstreetmap.org" >> <hot@openstreetmap.org>, Tom MacWright <t...@macwright.org>, Simon >>Johnson >> <sjohn...@redcross.org.uk> >> >> Subject: Re: [HOT] The status of iD in HOT contexts/projects >> >> Will, Robert, >> >> Thanks very much for the thoughtful feedback. I've mentally updated some >> priorities, and can give you a status update on a few of the items you >> mentioned: >> >> - GPS layer: see >> https://github.com/systemed/iD/issues/277#issuecomment-25187237 >> - Waypoint support in GPX traces: thanks to Simon Johnson's work, this >>will >> be included in 1.2.0, which I've just submitted to OSM.org. >> - Imagery offset database: this is another feature where a pull request >> would greatly expedite things. It's on my radar, but not a top priority. >> - Conflict detection: this could range from 'periodic preemptive check >>for >> new data', which might be fairly simple to implement, to 'full blown >> detection and resolution', which is very complex and likely out of scope >> entirely for iD. It would be helpful if you could add your opinion on >>what >> the necessary scope is and ideas for specific changes to the issue. >> >> cheers, >> John >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 8:06 AM, Banick, Robert >><robert.ban...@redcross.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Will, >>> >>> Super helpful feedback. I agree with your specific points but not with >>>the >>> overall thrust of your argument. Given that I'm about to conduct a >>>training >>> next week using iD, I hope I'm right :) >>> >>> Some constructive responses: >>> >>> Simon Johnson of the British Red Cross has been working on the GPX >>>point >>> layer since last week and has submitted a pull request to have it >>>fixed. I'm >>> not sure what the status of that pull request is but selfishly hope >>>that >>> it's incorporated by next week. Tom, John et al, any ETA on that? >>> >>> I'm planning on using the tasking manager to organize the iD tracing, >>>with >>> the hope that we can avoid conflicts this way. I agree that conflict >>> resolution is fairly poor and hope to get around it that way. Any >>>experience >>> on your end doing this? >>> >>> I never plan on relying on Bing anyways, since it's too fuzzy in many >>> rural areas of the developing world to be of any use. That's not the >>>fault >>> of the iD team of course, just the reality of imagery availability in >>>its >>> current state. >>> >>> Robert >>> >>> Robert Banick | Field GIS Coordinator | International Services | Ì >>> American Red Cross >>> >>> 2025 E Street NW, Washington, DC 20006 >>> >>> >>> From: "kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com" <kathleen.daniel...@gmail.com> >>> Date: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 8:49 AM >>> To: william skora <skorasau...@gmail.com> >>> Cc: John Firebaugh <john.fireba...@gmail.com>, "hot@openstreetmap.org" >>> <hot@openstreetmap.org>, Tom MacWright <t...@macwright.org> >>> Subject: Re: [HOT] The status of iD in HOT contexts/projects >>> >>> Great example of constructive feedback, Will. I'm sure that Tom, John, >>>and >>> team really appreciate it! >>> >>> On Sep 23, 2013 11:00 PM, "Will Skora" <skorasau...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Robert Soden mentioned the interest of using iD for OSM-related >>>> trainings during today's HOT tech chat. While in Northern Haiti for >>>> the CAP103 project in May-June 2013, a handful of the advanced mappers >>>> in Northern Haiti had learned about iD and wanted to learn how to use >>>> it, and I attempted to give 2-3 informal brief walkthroughs. >>>> afterwards, I wrote my experiences about it and then forgot to share >>>> them with the HOT community until now and thought it would be useful >>>> to share since we haven't discussed the use of iD in HOT contexts. >>>> >>>> First off, I truly admire the work done for iD. Its development has >>>> been rapid, the developers are very friendly, humble, and responsive, >>>> they set an example for the OSM developers' community. I understand >>>> that iD developers have other competiting priorities to help improve >>>> the editor but there's several issues that I've experienced and as a >>>> result, would really hesitate to use iD in HOT contexts where these >>>> issues would be appear. >>>> >>>> - Lack of a GPS layer >>>> - you can currently upload a single GPS track to display in the >>>> background, but you are not yet able to load the entire background of >>>> GPS traces from OSM of a given area. >>>> https://github.com/systemed/iD/issues/277 >>>> Although the quantity and quality of imagery sources available has >>>> increased in recent years, there's still a handful of areas in the >>>> world where there's no traceable imagery available, often in areas >>>> where HOT has operated . In these instances, mappers still have to >>>> rely solely on GPX points and GPS layers to map. >>>> >>>> - Lack of waypoint support in GPX traces >>>> https://github.com/systemed/iD/issues/1557 >>>> As we often take waypoints as we often take GPS traces and write down >>>> information that describes the area associated with the corresponding >>>> waypoint. >>>> >>>> - In some areas, bing imagery is 'offset' - a road traced with bing, >>>> for example, may be 30 or 50 meters away from where it is on the >>>> ground. To fix this, 'offsetting the imagery' is necessary. At the >>>> moment, iD has the capability to adjust imagery, but the adjustment >>>> must be manually done each time a user opens iD to edit OSM. >>>> Secondly, without a GPS trace layer (mentioned above), a user does not >>>> know whether the data already mapped to OSM are currently offset or >>>> not. This is a bit problematic to newer OSM users who may move data, >>>> believing that it should match up with bing imagery. >>>> https://github.com/systemed/iD/issues/1124 >>>> >>>> - conflict detection >>>> - no way to detect conflicts. This is problematic when there are >>>> mapping parties and mappers are editing in areas very close to each >>>> and you may be editing the same ways as your fellow users. >>>> https://github.com/systemed/iD/issues/1053 >>>> >>>> At the moment, iD is a great editor but the above issues can be quite >>>> problematic in some HOT contexts (that don't have great imagery for >>>> example) and would be considered dealbreakers in these HOT >>>> environments. >>>> >>>> Given the rapid development of iD, we may even have to reasses it in >>>> just a few months. Until then, we should keep iD on the back burner. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Will >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> HOT mailing list >>>> HOT@openstreetmap.org >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> HOT mailing list >> HOT@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >> > _______________________________________________ HOT mailing list HOT@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
