date:20150714

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

2015-07-14 Thread john whelan

The only thing I'd suggest is stronger empathise on the role of
validation.  Feedback by end users at a recent AID conference in Ottawa was
the maps were great but please could we arrange for them to be validated as
the quality was variable.

I note we include the words about new mappers but for the maps to be more
reliable they need to be validated and not just by another new mapper.

I like the idea that there is some sort of review of older projects with
the idea of either turning them into a missing map project or simply
archiving them.

Projects that ask for buildings typically don't get completed, could this
be taken into account in the activation process?

Thanks

Cheerio John

On 13 July 2015 at 21:40, Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org
wrote:

 Hello HOT community,



 There has been a tremendous collaboration to create the draft Activation
 Protocol; a great thank you to everyone who has contributed so far. On
 behalf of Tyler, Mhairi and myself; we welcome you to make one more review
 of the content this week before we ‘take-it-offline’ for print-editing
 (with a huge advanced thank you to Katja for helping us with that).



 With that said, please be advised that all the figures/tables/etc. are my
 sketch-up and should not be considered final/good/etc – just a sketch of
 what the final product will contain.



 The draft document can be found here:
 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qefHRE3_wUyG3lMSb7NlkSDtPuQeaQXsflkxt3E3xSA
 or via the HOT Drive.



 Thank you,

 =Russ



 Russell Deffner

 russell.deff...@hotosm.org

 Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)

 http://hotosm.org







 ___
 HOT mailing list
 HOT@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot


___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

2015-07-14 Thread john whelan

Do we follow the same standards in different places on different projects?
I deliberately did not mention Nepal and the built up areas are different.

Cheerio John

On 14 July 2015 at 17:38, Andrew Patterson andrew...@gmail.com wrote:

 Whilst I fully accept the concept of open debate in an attempt to reach a
 consensus, I do find the current discussion less than helpful, because of
 the range of definitions being thrown out, and the added geographic
 dimension to the definitions.  This is not helped by the variety in advise
 in the instructions for various tasks - ranging from if in doubt mark it
 as a path, and this can be upgraded by someone on the ground to much more
 specific instructions in the Nepalese instructions, for example.  But the
 type of terrain in which one might contemplate a 4 wheel drive in Africa is
 very different to that regularly used in Nepal.

 Surely if must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of
 definitions.  I rather support John Whelan's breakdown, where he suggests
 that if its to a small group of huts its probably a track, if
 its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two wheel
 
 tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of reasonable
 size then its unclassified
 
 .

 There was a huge correspondence in a similar vein during the early days
 of the Nepal disaster, which I found to be a real disincentive to
 contributing during the first couple of weeks, and I have only latterly
 started working on task.  There has also been an impressive and important
 Post Mortem exercise to improve things, and I would suggest that the size
 of the preset list is one area in which some serious pruning could be done
 with consequent increase in transparency to a new comer



 Andrew




 --
 Andrew Patterson

 The information contained in this e-mail and any
 files transmitted with it is confidential and intended for the addressee
 only.

 ___
 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] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

2015-07-14 Thread Andrew Patterson

Whilst I fully accept the concept of open debate in an attempt to reach a
consensus, I do find the current discussion less than helpful, because of
the range of definitions being thrown out, and the added geographic
dimension to the definitions.  This is not helped by the variety in advise
in the instructions for various tasks - ranging from if in doubt mark it
as a path, and this can be upgraded by someone on the ground to much more
specific instructions in the Nepalese instructions, for example.  But the
type of terrain in which one might contemplate a 4 wheel drive in Africa is
very different to that regularly used in Nepal.

Surely if must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of
definitions.  I rather support John Whelan's breakdown, where he suggests
that if its to a small group of huts its probably a track, if
its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two wheel

tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of reasonable
size then its unclassified

.

There was a huge correspondence in a similar vein during the early days of
the Nepal disaster, which I found to be a real disincentive to contributing
during the first couple of weeks, and I have only latterly started working
on task.  There has also been an impressive and important Post Mortem
exercise to improve things, and I would suggest that the size of the preset
list is one area in which some serious pruning could be done with
consequent increase in transparency to a new comer



Andrew




-- 
Andrew Patterson

The information contained in this e-mail and any
files transmitted with it is confidential and intended for the addressee
only.
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

[HOT] OSM Training workshop in Malawi

2015-07-14 Thread Justin Temwani Ng'ambi

Dear All,
There will be an OSM Training workshop at Chancellor College starting
from 31 July 2015. This has been organised by HOT interns in Malawi.
You are welcome to the function.

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

2015-07-14 Thread Russell Deffner

And I didn’t quite finish my thought – the training will be eventually 
‘passed-off’ to the TWG(s) ;) for ‘perpetual’ maintenance to accommodate 
changes in tools, etc. – the protocol should, once adopted after future 
reviewing/editing/passing back to the AWG/etc. (in my opinion) will be ‘adopted 
policy’ and will need amended/rescinded/etc. in order to change – hence, much 
of the ‘broad/general language’

=Russ

 

From: Mikel Maron [mailto:mikel.ma...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 8:36 PM
To: russell.deff...@hotosm.org; hot@openstreetmap.org
Subject: RE: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

 


Russ

 

Pretty cool to see this. This document has captured a ton of knowledge in a 
digestible format.

 

Look forward to seeing the graphics, that will really bring this together. 
There are also places where the phrasing can be tightened up a bit; sorry don't 
have time to edit myself, but someone with an eye for that might be a help with 
a quick review.

 

Only question I have is what happens after adoption. Is there a set schedule in 
place to review the protocol and make updates? For instance, I'm sure some of 
the tools we use will evolve and change in time.

 

Thanks again for yours and everyone's work on this, great progress for HOT.

Mikel

 

At Jul 13, 2015, 9:42:55 PM, Russell Deffner wrote:

Hello HOT community,

There has been a tremendous collaboration to create the draft Activation 
Protocol; a great thank you to everyone who has contributed so far. On behalf 
of Tyler, Mhairi and myself; we welcome you to make one more review of the 
content this week before we ‘take-it-offline’ for print-editing (with a huge 
advanced thank you to Katja for helping us with that).

With that said, please be advised that all the figures/tables/etc. are my 
sketch-up and should not be considered final/good/etc – just a sketch of what 
the final product will contain.

The draft document can be found here: 
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qefHRE3_wUyG3lMSb7NlkSDtPuQeaQXsflkxt3E3xSA 
or via the HOT Drive.

Thank you,

=Russ

Russell Deffner

russell.deff...@hotosm.org javascript:return 

Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)

http://hotosm.org http://hotosm.org/ 

 

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

2015-07-14 Thread john whelan

My feeling is validation should be formally mentioned before phase three.
I agree the document is a great step forward over what we have but just as
in computer programming the earlier you catch the mistakes the cheaper it
is to fix so in HOT mapping.  Catch someone's mistakes early and hopefully
they won't continue to make the same mistake again.  Leave it to the end of
the project and you have twenty tiles to clean up whilst catch it early and
you only need clean up one.

Tactful words are not my specialty and I'm sure that someone can phrase it
better.  Perhaps it should be in the instructions to project managers, line
up a couple of people who are willing to validate and stick a note on the
project this project is validated as the tiles are completed.

I merely raise the issue.

Cheerio John

On 14 July 2015 at 19:30, Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org
wrote:

 Hi John,



 If there is some particular wording suggestion you have, go ahead and
 comment directly on the document.  In general, this does increase the role
 of validation as we are going to build out a training specifically for that
 role.  I was actually getting around to including you in the building of
 that training, so in general I think these concerns will be addressed
 during that process.



 Chat more soon,

 =Russ



 *From:* john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Tuesday, July 14, 2015 4:33 AM
 *To:* Russell Deffner
 *Cc:* hot
 *Subject:* Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol



 The only thing I'd suggest is stronger empathise on the role of
 validation.  Feedback by end users at a recent AID conference in Ottawa was
 the maps were great but please could we arrange for them to be validated as
 the quality was variable.

 I note we include the words about new mappers but for the maps to be more
 reliable they need to be validated and not just by another new mapper.

 I like the idea that there is some sort of review of older projects with
 the idea of either turning them into a missing map project or simply
 archiving them.

 Projects that ask for buildings typically don't get completed, could this
 be taken into account in the activation process?

 Thanks



 Cheerio John



 On 13 July 2015 at 21:40, Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org
 wrote:

 Hello HOT community,



 There has been a tremendous collaboration to create the draft Activation
 Protocol; a great thank you to everyone who has contributed so far. On
 behalf of Tyler, Mhairi and myself; we welcome you to make one more review
 of the content this week before we ‘take-it-offline’ for print-editing
 (with a huge advanced thank you to Katja for helping us with that).



 With that said, please be advised that all the figures/tables/etc. are my
 sketch-up and should not be considered final/good/etc – just a sketch of
 what the final product will contain.



 The draft document can be found here:
 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qefHRE3_wUyG3lMSb7NlkSDtPuQeaQXsflkxt3E3xSA
 or via the HOT Drive.



 Thank you,

 =Russ



 Russell Deffner

 russell.deff...@hotosm.org

 Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)

 http://hotosm.org








 ___
 HOT mailing list
 HOT@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot



___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

2015-07-14 Thread Russell Deffner

Hi Mikel,

 

Yes, please I think anyone who is logged into a ‘recognized HOT account’ (maybe 
even any google compatible account) should be able to switch to ‘suggestion 
mode’ and directly do some copy-editing.

 

To answer your question, after ‘adoption of protocol’ we will still have the 
flexibility of the actually training – as ‘Activation Curriculum Specialist’ I 
will be facilitating the initial development of both LearnOSM modules to fill 
out what is missing there (which will be quite a lot) and the deployment of the 
‘HOT Training Center’/officially launching our Moodle development site once 
that is built-out.

 

Thanks for the praise and all the great feedback,

=Russ

 

From: Mikel Maron [mailto:mikel.ma...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 8:36 PM
To: russell.deff...@hotosm.org; hot@openstreetmap.org
Subject: RE: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

 


Russ

 

Pretty cool to see this. This document has captured a ton of knowledge in a 
digestible format.

 

Look forward to seeing the graphics, that will really bring this together. 
There are also places where the phrasing can be tightened up a bit; sorry don't 
have time to edit myself, but someone with an eye for that might be a help with 
a quick review.

 

Only question I have is what happens after adoption. Is there a set schedule in 
place to review the protocol and make updates? For instance, I'm sure some of 
the tools we use will evolve and change in time.

 

Thanks again for yours and everyone's work on this, great progress for HOT.

Mikel

 

At Jul 13, 2015, 9:42:55 PM, Russell Deffner wrote:

Hello HOT community,

There has been a tremendous collaboration to create the draft Activation 
Protocol; a great thank you to everyone who has contributed so far. On behalf 
of Tyler, Mhairi and myself; we welcome you to make one more review of the 
content this week before we ‘take-it-offline’ for print-editing (with a huge 
advanced thank you to Katja for helping us with that).

With that said, please be advised that all the figures/tables/etc. are my 
sketch-up and should not be considered final/good/etc – just a sketch of what 
the final product will contain.

The draft document can be found here: 
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qefHRE3_wUyG3lMSb7NlkSDtPuQeaQXsflkxt3E3xSA 
or via the HOT Drive.

Thank you,

=Russ

Russell Deffner

russell.deff...@hotosm.org javascript:return 

Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)

http://hotosm.org http://hotosm.org/ 

 

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

2015-07-14 Thread Suzan Reed

Is there a way to have only those tags used in a specific activation loaded 
into iD and JOSM so none of the others show? Or something similar? 

Suzan 


 On Jul 14, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Andrew Patterson andrew...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 Whilst I fully accept the concept of open debate in an attempt to reach a 
 consensus, I do find the current discussion less than helpful, because of the 
 range of definitions being thrown out, and the added geographic dimension to 
 the definitions.  This is not helped by the variety in advise in the 
 instructions for various tasks - ranging from if in doubt mark it as a path, 
 and this can be upgraded by someone on the ground to much more specific 
 instructions in the Nepalese instructions, for example.  But the type of 
 terrain in which one might contemplate a 4 wheel drive in Africa is very 
 different to that regularly used in Nepal.
 
 Surely if must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of 
 definitions.  I rather support John Whelan's breakdown, where he suggests 
 that if its to a small group of huts its probably a track, if
 its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two wheel 
 tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of reasonable
 size then its unclassified.
 
 There was a huge correspondence in a similar vein during the early days of 
 the Nepal disaster, which I found to be a real disincentive to contributing 
 during the first couple of weeks, and I have only latterly started working on 
 task.  There has also been an impressive and important Post Mortem exercise 
 to improve things, and I would suggest that the size of the preset list is 
 one area in which some serious pruning could be done with consequent increase 
 in transparency to a new comer
 
 
 Andrew
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 Andrew Patterson
 
 The information contained in this e-mail and any
 files transmitted with it is confidential and intended for the addressee only.
 ___
 HOT mailing list
 HOT@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot


___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

2015-07-14 Thread David Toy

Hi Russell,

A new voice on the mailing list.

Who is the intended audience for this document?
If it includes 'volunteers trying to understand how HOT works' may I/others
also make suggestions to the document?

(I ask because I may have missed a previous thread, and I'm not sure how
open source HOT is.)

David

On 15 July 2015 at 01:12, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote:

 My feeling is validation should be formally mentioned before phase three.
 I agree the document is a great step forward over what we have but just as
 in computer programming the earlier you catch the mistakes the cheaper it
 is to fix so in HOT mapping.  Catch someone's mistakes early and hopefully
 they won't continue to make the same mistake again.  Leave it to the end of
 the project and you have twenty tiles to clean up whilst catch it early and
 you only need clean up one.

 Tactful words are not my specialty and I'm sure that someone can phrase it
 better.  Perhaps it should be in the instructions to project managers, line
 up a couple of people who are willing to validate and stick a note on the
 project this project is validated as the tiles are completed.

 I merely raise the issue.

 Cheerio John

 On 14 July 2015 at 19:30, Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org
 wrote:

 Hi John,



 If there is some particular wording suggestion you have, go ahead and
 comment directly on the document.  In general, this does increase the role
 of validation as we are going to build out a training specifically for that
 role.  I was actually getting around to including you in the building of
 that training, so in general I think these concerns will be addressed
 during that process.



 Chat more soon,

 =Russ



 *From:* john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Tuesday, July 14, 2015 4:33 AM
 *To:* Russell Deffner
 *Cc:* hot
 *Subject:* Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol



 The only thing I'd suggest is stronger empathise on the role of
 validation.  Feedback by end users at a recent AID conference in Ottawa was
 the maps were great but please could we arrange for them to be validated as
 the quality was variable.

 I note we include the words about new mappers but for the maps to be more
 reliable they need to be validated and not just by another new mapper.

 I like the idea that there is some sort of review of older projects with
 the idea of either turning them into a missing map project or simply
 archiving them.

 Projects that ask for buildings typically don't get completed, could this
 be taken into account in the activation process?

 Thanks



 Cheerio John



 On 13 July 2015 at 21:40, Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org
 wrote:

 Hello HOT community,



 There has been a tremendous collaboration to create the draft Activation
 Protocol; a great thank you to everyone who has contributed so far. On
 behalf of Tyler, Mhairi and myself; we welcome you to make one more review
 of the content this week before we ‘take-it-offline’ for print-editing
 (with a huge advanced thank you to Katja for helping us with that).



 With that said, please be advised that all the figures/tables/etc. are my
 sketch-up and should not be considered final/good/etc – just a sketch of
 what the final product will contain.



 The draft document can be found here:
 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qefHRE3_wUyG3lMSb7NlkSDtPuQeaQXsflkxt3E3xSA
 or via the HOT Drive.



 Thank you,

 =Russ



 Russell Deffner

 russell.deff...@hotosm.org

 Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)

 http://hotosm.org








 ___
 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

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

2015-07-14 Thread Russell Deffner

Hi John,

 

If there is some particular wording suggestion you have, go ahead and comment 
directly on the document.  In general, this does increase the role of 
validation as we are going to build out a training specifically for that role.  
I was actually getting around to including you in the building of that 
training, so in general I think these concerns will be addressed during that 
process.

 

Chat more soon,

=Russ

 

From: john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 4:33 AM
To: Russell Deffner
Cc: hot
Subject: Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

 

The only thing I'd suggest is stronger empathise on the role of validation.  
Feedback by end users at a recent AID conference in Ottawa was the maps were 
great but please could we arrange for them to be validated as the quality was 
variable.

I note we include the words about new mappers but for the maps to be more 
reliable they need to be validated and not just by another new mapper.

I like the idea that there is some sort of review of older projects with the 
idea of either turning them into a missing map project or simply archiving them.

Projects that ask for buildings typically don't get completed, could this be 
taken into account in the activation process?

Thanks

 

Cheerio John 

 

On 13 July 2015 at 21:40, Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org wrote:

Hello HOT community,

 

There has been a tremendous collaboration to create the draft Activation 
Protocol; a great thank you to everyone who has contributed so far. On behalf 
of Tyler, Mhairi and myself; we welcome you to make one more review of the 
content this week before we ‘take-it-offline’ for print-editing (with a huge 
advanced thank you to Katja for helping us with that).

 

With that said, please be advised that all the figures/tables/etc. are my 
sketch-up and should not be considered final/good/etc – just a sketch of what 
the final product will contain.

 

The draft document can be found here: 
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qefHRE3_wUyG3lMSb7NlkSDtPuQeaQXsflkxt3E3xSA 
or via the HOT Drive.

 

Thank you,

=Russ

 

Russell Deffner

russell.deff...@hotosm.org

Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)

http://hotosm.org http://hotosm.org/ 

 

 

 


___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

 

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

2015-07-14 Thread Russell Deffner

Hi David, welcome!

 

This is a ‘high-level’ document/policy of HOT, although we have made a dramatic 
compromise from the tradition NGO policy to a much more informative one.  With 
that in mind, please do comment – as a co-author we will be doing ‘final edits’ 
with our Executive Director, Tyler Radford, and then he will present it to the 
HOT Board for review and/or however they want to handle it J

 

=Russ

 

From: john.david@gmail.com [mailto:john.david@gmail.com] On Behalf Of 
David Toy
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 6:17 PM
To: john whelan
Cc: Russell Deffner; hot
Subject: Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

 

Hi Russell, 

 

A new voice on the mailing list. 

 

Who is the intended audience for this document?

If it includes 'volunteers trying to understand how HOT works' may I/others 
also make suggestions to the document?

 

(I ask because I may have missed a previous thread, and I'm not sure how open 
source HOT is.)

 

David

 

On 15 July 2015 at 01:12, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote:

My feeling is validation should be formally mentioned before phase three.  I 
agree the document is a great step forward over what we have but just as in 
computer programming the earlier you catch the mistakes the cheaper it is to 
fix so in HOT mapping.  Catch someone's mistakes early and hopefully they won't 
continue to make the same mistake again.  Leave it to the end of the project 
and you have twenty tiles to clean up whilst catch it early and you only need 
clean up one.

Tactful words are not my specialty and I'm sure that someone can phrase it 
better.  Perhaps it should be in the instructions to project managers, line up 
a couple of people who are willing to validate and stick a note on the project 
this project is validated as the tiles are completed.

I merely raise the issue.

Cheerio John

 

On 14 July 2015 at 19:30, Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org wrote:

Hi John,

 

If there is some particular wording suggestion you have, go ahead and comment 
directly on the document.  In general, this does increase the role of 
validation as we are going to build out a training specifically for that role.  
I was actually getting around to including you in the building of that 
training, so in general I think these concerns will be addressed during that 
process.

 

Chat more soon,

=Russ

 

From: john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 4:33 AM
To: Russell Deffner
Cc: hot
Subject: Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

 

The only thing I'd suggest is stronger empathise on the role of validation.  
Feedback by end users at a recent AID conference in Ottawa was the maps were 
great but please could we arrange for them to be validated as the quality was 
variable.

I note we include the words about new mappers but for the maps to be more 
reliable they need to be validated and not just by another new mapper.

I like the idea that there is some sort of review of older projects with the 
idea of either turning them into a missing map project or simply archiving them.

Projects that ask for buildings typically don't get completed, could this be 
taken into account in the activation process?

Thanks

 

Cheerio John 

 

On 13 July 2015 at 21:40, Russell Deffner russell.deff...@hotosm.org wrote:

Hello HOT community,

 

There has been a tremendous collaboration to create the draft Activation 
Protocol; a great thank you to everyone who has contributed so far. On behalf 
of Tyler, Mhairi and myself; we welcome you to make one more review of the 
content this week before we ‘take-it-offline’ for print-editing (with a huge 
advanced thank you to Katja for helping us with that).

 

With that said, please be advised that all the figures/tables/etc. are my 
sketch-up and should not be considered final/good/etc – just a sketch of what 
the final product will contain.

 

The draft document can be found here: 
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qefHRE3_wUyG3lMSb7NlkSDtPuQeaQXsflkxt3E3xSA 
or via the HOT Drive.

 

Thank you,

=Russ

 

Russell Deffner

russell.deff...@hotosm.org

Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)

http://hotosm.org http://hotosm.org/ 

 

 

 


___
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

[HOT] reduced buildings

2015-07-14 Thread Daniel Specht

In Nepal imagery (Projects 1060 and 1062 I see many buildings where after
the earthquake they are narrower and a darker color, and maybe a little
less squared off, but they are still standing. Does anyone know what the
status of these buildings is?  I've been calling them brownfields.

-- 
Dan
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

2015-07-14 Thread Mikel Maron

RussPretty cool to see this. This document has captured a ton of knowledge in a digestible format.Look forward to seeing the graphics, that will really bring this together. There are also places where the phrasing can be tightened up a bit; sorry don't have time to edit myself, but someone with an eye for that might be a help with a quick review.Only question I have is what happens after adoption. Is there a set schedule in place to review the protocol and make updates? For instance, I'm sure some of the tools we use will evolve and change in time.Thanks again for yours and everyone's work on this, great progress for HOT.MikelAt Jul 13, 2015, 9:42:55 PM, Russell Deffner wrote:Hello HOT community, There has been a tremendous collaboration to create the draft Activation Protocol; a great thank you to everyone who has contributed so far. On behalf of Tyler, Mhairi and myself; we welcome you to make one more review of the content this week before we ‘take-it-offline’ for print-editing (with a huge advanced thank you to Katja for helping us with that). With that said, please be advised that all the figures/tables/etc. are my sketch-up and should not be considered final/good/etc – just a sketch of what the final product will contain. The draft document can be found here: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1qefHRE3_wUyG3lMSb7NlkSDtPuQeaQXsflkxt3E3xSA or via the HOT Drive. Thank you,=Russ Russell Deffnerrussell.deff...@hotosm.orgHumanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)http://hotosm.org

___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

2015-07-14 Thread Steve Bower

I agree with Andrew regarding the disincentive of having inconsistent
guidance on highway tagging, and associated discussions that don't
necessarily reach conclusions. I think we need to continue to prioritize
this known issue, to reduce that disincentive and improve data
quality/consistency.

I'm curious to see any findings of the subsequent post mortem work to
develop more clear and consistent guidance for highway tagging. Ultimately,
I think the available guidance needs to be consolidated, clarified, and
made more consistent. That's a substantial task, but as Andrew said, it
surely must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of
definitions.

Cheers,
~~Steve


On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Suzan Reed su...@suzanreed.com wrote:

 Is there a way to have only those tags used in a specific activation
 loaded into iD and JOSM so none of the others show? Or something similar?

 Suzan


  On Jul 14, 2015, at 2:38 PM, Andrew Patterson andrew...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  Whilst I fully accept the concept of open debate in an attempt to reach
 a consensus, I do find the current discussion less than helpful, because of
 the range of definitions being thrown out, and the added geographic
 dimension to the definitions.  This is not helped by the variety in advise
 in the instructions for various tasks - ranging from if in doubt mark it
 as a path, and this can be upgraded by someone on the ground to much more
 specific instructions in the Nepalese instructions, for example.  But the
 type of terrain in which one might contemplate a 4 wheel drive in Africa is
 very different to that regularly used in Nepal.
 
  Surely if must be possible to come to a conclusion for a generic set of
 definitions.  I rather support John Whelan's breakdown, where he suggests
 that if its to a small group of huts its probably a track, if
  its to narrow for a 4X4 and winds its a path, and if I can see two
 wheel tracks then its a track unless its between two settlements of
 reasonable
  size then its unclassified.
 
  There was a huge correspondence in a similar vein during the early days
 of the Nepal disaster, which I found to be a real disincentive to
 contributing during the first couple of weeks, and I have only latterly
 started working on task.  There has also been an impressive and important
 Post Mortem exercise to improve things, and I would suggest that the size
 of the preset list is one area in which some serious pruning could be done
 with consequent increase in transparency to a new comer
 
 
  Andrew
 
 
 
 
  --
  Andrew Patterson
 
  The information contained in this e-mail and any
  files transmitted with it is confidential and intended for the addressee
 only.
  ___
  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

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

Re: [HOT] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[HOT] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

[HOT] OSM Training workshop in Malawi

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

Re: [HOT] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

[HOT] reduced buildings

Re: [HOT] Final request for feedback - Activation Protocol

Re: [HOT] HOT] paths, tracks and unclassified in West Africa

14 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information