from:"Steve Bower"

Re: [HOT] How to become a validator (a suggestion)

2016-04-11 Thread Steve Bower

Graham,
Excellent questions on an important topic - I think HOT has improved its
mentoring & management of validation & validators, and needs to continue
that effort.

There is a validation course at the HOT Training Center [1], "required
training for, and will teach the essential knowledge required to, perform
the Validation Role during an Activation". I have not taken the course, and
don't know if/how it is "enforced" as a required course.

Regarding "coaching", questioned in your summary list of key points : I
think the point is that validators need to be good coaches, giving feedback
to the mappers being validated (as John clarified). Feedback from
validators has in the past been largely lacking, in my limited experience -
hence new mappers don't always learn from their mistakes. The Tasking
Manager could be enhanced to simplify and encourage feedback from
validators to appropriate mappers.

Mike Thompson : Regarding:

"1) If the instructions explicitly say not to map something (e.g. tracks)
but some were mapped and were done so correctly by the generally accepted
practices in OSM, do you leave them?  I did."

I would give the feedback that it was not necessary to trace the tracks,
and that it would be preferable to stick to the requested features in the
future in order to complete the project as quickly as possible. However,
they were traced correctly, and thank you for the contribution and your
extra work. (As John said, in general the work of others should not be
deleted, only corrected as needed.)

[1] http://courses.hotosm.org/course/index.php?categoryid=2

Cheers,
~~Steve

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Mike Thompson  wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 11:25 AM, john whelan 
> wrote:
>
>> If you read through the wiki it specifically mentions highway=service.
>>
>> >By default, primary/secondary/tertiary/unclassified/residential and
>> service highway =* are
>> supposed to be paved.
>>
> It would be more clear and obvious if highway=service appeared in the
> table with the other possible values, but I will accept this as indicating
> that we should "highway=service" roads in Africa.
>
>
>>
>> When I'm validating then I consider I'm validating the work done by HOT
>> mappers on this project on the tile.  Any previous work that was there
>> before I consider governed by the general rules of OSM ie don't touch it
>> unless its very clearly wrong and even then there is a long winded protocol
>> that it is recommended you follow.  I certainly won't delete anything
>> because it wasn't there on the image.  i can be helpful and looking
>> at the number of edits the mapper has made can give you a clue as well.
>>
> Good advice
>
>>
>>
> ___
> 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] Fwd: Accuracy ( international women's day)

2016-03-02 Thread Steve Bower

Gertrude,
Be aware that although "recreational" GPS devices have improved in
accuracy, my tests of one tablet (bought a year ago) had occassional
location errors of 100+ meters, which lasted for up to 1+ minutes. I've
seen similar test results reported elsewhere. You may want to consider the
accuracy of your GPS device, and test recreational devices (most phones &
tablets) by comparing readings with known locations.

Good luck,

~~Steve



On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 11:12 PM, Gertrude Hope 
wrote:

> Hi Geof,
> What was their worry is that, if what we are using is not so accurate,
> They will end up tracing a person's toilet or water tap in a different
> compound.
>
> Gertrude
> On Mar 1, 2016 1:05 AM, "Geoffrey Kateregga"  wrote:
>
>> Hi Trudy,
>>
>> Thanks for the work done so far in building an OSM community in Zambia,
>> I can also share with you my experience in using OSMTracker, GPS units
>> and field papers from our mapping under "Ramani Huria" in Dar es Salaam.
>>
>> The accuracy of OSMTracker improves when you have an internet connection
>> and it can go as high as 3m or less, it is necessary to check the level of
>> accuracy when picking a way point. What usually helps is when you import
>> the track and waypoints into JOSM, then you can place the nodes more
>> accurately by looking at the imagery.
>>
>> Using Fieldpapers with Bing imagery may not be very helpful in informal
>> settlements where the houses are very close to each other, locating where
>> you are on the fieldpaper when in the field maybe challenging. If you can
>> afford it, acquiring several Garmin etrex 20 or 30 GPS units will prove
>> useful.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Geoffrey.
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 1:35 AM, Gertrude Hope 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you Chris
>>>
>>> Gertrude
>>> On Mar 1, 2016 12:33 AM, "Chris Fleming"  wrote:
>>>
 Blake has mostly covered it. But worth saying explicitly, if we assume
 that the best you're going to get on a GPS is 5m, but your concern is that
 you're mapping things that are much closer together - then the solution is
 to combine the GPS and paper based approach. The important thing from a
 navigation point of view is getting the relevant features correctly placed
 reactive to each other.

 What you will find is that the combination of airial/gps and survey
 data will bring the accuracy down. But ultimately, relative postition is
 the key.

 Cheers
 Chris

 On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 at 17:43 Gertrude Hope 
 wrote:

> Hi Blake,
> Thank you so much for The information.
> On Feb 29, 2016 7:31 PM, "Blake Girardot"  wrote:
> ___
> 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 mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Tagging hut=yes

2015-09-30 Thread Steve Bower

I agree that building=hut is difficult to discern from remote imagery, and
fairly ambiguous. The definition for building=hut in the Map Features list
[1] is, "A hut is a small and crude shelter."

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features

~~Steve



On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Russell Deffner  wrote:

> Dale, hopefully you meant “building=hut” not capitalized?
>
>
>
> All, I agree with most in this thread, but there was a mention of the ‘HOT
> Workflow’; which I would clarify as being: create instructions assuming
> most mappers will have no local knowledge; so typically that means –
> building=yes is always ‘correct’ until someone who knows for sure can
> ‘upgrade’ the tag; doesn’t matter so much if point/polygon is used as a
> single node with building=yes as the only tag can always be upgraded as
> well (however, for some projects we are actually trying to get accurate
> building footprints accurate for estimations, etc. – so that should be
> specified in the instructions). Otherwise, if we are trying to map specific
> things like schools, or huts, etc. then that should be specified in the
> project instructions with a link to a tracing guide or further instructions
> for how to identify the feature and of course the appropriate tag(s) to use.
>
>
>
> Just my 2,
>
> =Russ
>
>
>
> *From:* Dale Kunce [mailto:dale.ku...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 29, 2015 7:58 PM
> *To:* Courtney Clark; Suzan Reed
> *Cc:* hot@openstreetmap.org; chris zontine
> *Subject:* Re: [HOT] Tagging hut=yes
>
>
>
> At the Red Cross we've used building =Hut looking at fire prevention in
> Uganda in 2012. Generally these buildings were round and all tags were
> field verified. We also use it in some field mapping activities once we
> know the basic construction type. However, I agree with a lot that has been
> said already. Using building=Hut is case specific and shouldn't apply to
> all round buildings, no matter where they are.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015, 9:01 PM Courtney Clark 
> wrote:
>
> I agree with Suzan and Jorieke, both in general and specifically as
> someone closely involved with the project around task 1034. While this
> issue may still be in discussion among the HOT community, I can say that
> for this project, the simple building tag is preferred instead of hut.
>
>
>
> Thank you, Chris, both for asking this question and for helping with our
> task!
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, September 29, 2015, Suzan Reed  wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> In many countries people’s houses, churches, workshops and other buildings
> are round, not square. Or, a building can be a combination of round and
> square. So tagging should be building=yes. Just because a building is round
> does not make it a “hut”, whatever that means. It’s a home, church, or
> industrial building same as if it were square.
>
> Two cents from me.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Suzan
>
>
> On Sep 29, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Jorieke Vyncke 
> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Just giving my two cents.
>
> For me mapping a building like a hut does not signify a lot.
> What is exactly a hut? Is it just a round building? Round buildings
> can be made out of several materials and have several different
> functions. Also why would a round building get another tag if a square
> building is almost the same size, made out of the same materials and
> has the same function?
>
> What significant is for me, is that it is a house, a granary or a roof
> to hide against the sun. Also the material of what it is made of is
> significant: roof out of straw or metal, walls out of bricks or clay
> ... In my opinion drawing a circle and tagging it with building = yes
> , and potentially other tags is the best.
>
> For me mapping buildings as huts doesn't signify a lot, on the
> contrary, I don't know what people who are living in the mapped 'huts'
> will think of it that their house is mapped like a 'hut'. I suppose it
> depends on how 'huts' are perceived in every culture. So yes also for
> this reason I prefer mapping: building=yes.
>
> Like I said, just my two cents :-)
>
> Best greetings,
>
> Jorieke
>
>
>
> 2015-09-29 11:55 GMT, john whelan :
> > The HOT convention seems to be tag them building=yes.  OSM and HOT are
> > slightly different in OSM it is acceptable to tag a node rather than the
> > HOT convention circle.  Because HOT has a lot of very new mappers and
> their
> > work is validated ie often corrected I think it is important to clarify
> > this.
> >
> > Also the training material needs to be considered, having one answer in
> one
> > place and having the training material say something else would be
> awkward.
> >
> > Cheerio John
> >
> > On 28 September 2015 at 22:29, Dale Kunce  wrote:
> >
> >> Chris,
> >> I would use the more widely used tag building=hut.
> >>
> >> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=hut#values
> >>
> >> Dale
>

Re: [HOT] Validation

2015-09-02 Thread Steve Bower

I added this to the relevant GitHub issue [1], which is currently being
addressed.

~~Steve

[1] https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/401


On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:17 AM, Andrew Patterson 
wrote:

> I like Daniel's "Start Mapping" and "Stop Mapping".  The discussion seems
> to be evolving in the right direction as far as the text is concerned - but
> may I also mention the layout.  The few times I have hit the "Mark Task is
> Done" button, I have been in a hurry and had been aiming for the "Unlock"
> button immediately to its left.  Is there a need for two unlock buttons
> however they are labelled? - the higher button is well placed and has
> nothing close to it to add to my confusion !
>
> 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] [HOT Training] Re: LearnOSM Glossary

2015-07-24 Thread Steve Bower

+1 for Susan's comments.

A multi-language GIS glossary (eventually) will be a real accomplishment
for OSM.

A few other thoughts you may have already considered:

I suggest maintaining either a LearnOSM glossary or the OSM wiki glossary,
but not both. One can point to the other. Or, the LearnOSM glossary could
be shorter, focused on beginners, and point to a more comprehensive OSM
wiki glossary.

OGC has a glossary [1] that's copyright OGC, but they might make it
available to OSM on request.

The wiki.gis.com glossary might be of use [2].

[1] http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/glossary
[2] http://wiki.gis.com/wiki/index.php/GIS_Glossary

~~Steve

On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Suzan Reed su...@suzanreed.com wrote:

Hi althio and all,

As an organizer of information and a newbie, my opinion is to leave
everything in one list and not divide it. It should be alphabetic.

There is a lot to learn reading through a Glossary, and it’s always useful
to have everything in one place. It’s easy to find what you are looking for
when organized alphabetically. If you want, you could annotate which terms
are for OSM, HOT, and Activation in parentheses at the end of each entry.
We have done that when a glossary combines words from different languages
or references similar to this situation. It’s also important to format the
page so the entries are easy to read.

Suzan

On Jul 24, 2015, at 9:28 AM, althio althio.fo...@gmail.com wrote:

Hi all,

I am not sure how to handle the glossary mixture of:
- basic OSM terms
- basic HOT terms
- advanced HOT/Activation terms

I mean the growing glossary page could become overwhelming for a beginner.

What do you think?
All glossay in one continuous page? One page, sections by topics?
Differents pages, one glossary by section
(beginner/JOSM/remote/Activation...)?

Back to the content, a few proposals:
- We could read through the content of LearnOSM to flag terms that
need to be included in the glossary (best done by newcomers!)
- We could take a pick in the OSM wiki glossary and see if any of
those terms is used in LearnOSM
[OSM wiki glossary] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Glossary

Best

althio

On 13 July 2015 at 22:51, Yachtsman Dev yachtsman@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,

My name is Anwaario and I am one of the LearnOSM Interns this summer.

I have been tasked with improving the LearnOSM glossary .

Help us make the LearnOSM glossary more informative by forwarding your
vocabulary suggestions.

This is an ongoing project and new terms will be added and live as soon
as
they are approved by my mentors.

All replies should be sent directly to both me and the list.

Respectfully,

Anwaario

skype: hahafresh
email: yachtsman@gmail.com
phone: 415.562.6927
intern/blog: https://yachtsmandev.wordpress.com/
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Anwaario

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

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Training WG group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to training+unsubscr...@hotosm.org.
To post to this group, send email to train...@hotosm.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/a/hotosm.org/d/msgid/training/243816FF-59ED-4C07-9533-3A02840C8738%40suzanreed.com
.

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

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

2015-07-16 Thread Steve Bower

A fundamental problem is that the current road/path tagging scheme does not
distinguish between:

  • rough tagging used for remote mapping during activations, and
  • detailed tagging based on local knowledge.

Current tags are used for both, which leads to confusion since the custom
activation definition may differ somewhat from the permanent
definition. Also, there is future confusion since the level of detail
(local knowledge) is not recorded.

A 2-tier scheme could solve that, with separate tags for rough tagging,
and detailed tags based on local knowledge.

Another solution would be a separate tag recording the level of certainty
or verification, but a 2-tier scheme might be easier to manage and to
render.

~~Steve


On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Thomas Gertin tger...@gmail.com wrote:

 Some great input is being provided. Primary / secondary / tertiary
 highways are not encountered very often in a typical HOT project by the
 average mapper. Therefore even though they are very important to classify
 and may be mentioned in the training material, they should not be
 emphasized. Classifying these highway types is better suited for a ‘meta’
 task where a mapper would look at a larger zoomed out area and gain better
 context for classifying these highway types by analyzing the sizes of the
 urban areas that are connected by them. In addition, on the ground
 validation would always be great to have as well.

 I agree that more validation is greatly needed on HOT projects in general.
 I think the greatest challenge is how to accomplish this objective; there
 are simply not enough people doing it. Maybe we can incentivize validation
 with badges.

 I think if HOT wants to endorse regional tagging schemes for HOT projects,
 then West Africa or Africa in general would be a good place to start.

 Thanks,

 Tom G



 On Jul 16, 2015, at 9:32 AM, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote:

 Validation can mean many things, in a HOT context to me it means going in
 and correcting the glaring errors.  Highway classification or
 missclassification is subjective as has been stated so I would not include
 putting the correct tags on Primary / secondary / tertiary as part of the
 primary role of the validator.  I would say changing highway=pedestrian to
 highway=path in a rural area of West Africa would be part of validation.

 I work with three others who do validation, there aren't many of us who do
 it if you look through the projects there are very few that are validated
 completely and setting the bar to high means fewer people will do it.
 Personally I think we need more validation whether that should be two
 passes, one a less experienced validator and one a more careful validation
 is one open to debate.  On one project I did a quick and dirty validation
 that picked up 80% of the errors and it was suggested that I should have
 done a more complete validation.  It's a judgement call, my feeling was the
 quality and reliability of the mapping was better after a quick and dirty
 validation which was not to my normal validation standard than without it.

 In my opinion OSM mapping with no resource constraints often is done to a
 high quality standard, in HOT mapping we don't have enough trained and
 experienced mappers and validators to map to the standard we would like to
 have the maps mapped to in the time that the clients would like the map.

 So what can we simplify?

 Cheerio John

 On 16 July 2015 at 09:13, Robert Banick rban...@gmail.com wrote:

 That makes sense. Would you suggest putting road classification into the
 validation stage then? Or have a classification stage in between?

 On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:03 AM, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 The suggestion is not that Primary / secondary / tertiary should not be
 mapped, often when the HOT mappers start the major highways are tagged
 Primary / secondary / tertiary the suggestion is to simplify guidance to
 new or inexperienced mappers.  76% of HOT Nepal mappers mapped for an hour
 or two and that was it.

 I don't think we can afford to give them four hours training in how to
 classify a road, there would be no time left for mapping.

 For these sort of highways then map something and let someone else
 upgrade the tag to Primary / secondary / tertiary is my suggestion.

 Cheerio John

 On 16 July 2015 at 08:55, Robert Banick rban...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hey all,

 Speaking as a humanitarian GISer who's used HOT road layers quite a bit
 in a few crises, the road classifications really help. Primary / secondary
 / tertiary are useful, albeit vey incomplete, measures of the importance of
 roads that we can use to eyeball transit times etc. I would be strongly
 against ignoring those classification tags. I do agree we need more
 consistency in how they're applied however.

 Perhaps we can have general regional guidelines and then someone gets
 charged with developing a country-specific taxonomy for any major
 activations?

 Best,
 Robert

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

2015-07-16 Thread Steve Bower

One issue with using only a verified tag is that you would still have
different tag definitions for rough/remote mapping vs detailed/verified
mapping. That could be confusing. The current 24 detailed highway tags
[1] might distill down to about 5-8 rough classification tags, depending
on the country. (Though a verified tag could still be of use.)

[1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway

~~Steve


On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 2:42 PM, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote:

 No, sounds too simple and sensible.

 Cheerio John

 On 16 July 2015 at 13:22, Tom Taylor tom.taylor.s...@gmail.com wrote:

 Why not the source tag? If it indicates survey or local knowledge instead
 of or as well as remote imagery, credibility is  improved.

 Tom Taylor

 On 16/07/2015 1:02 PM, john whelan wrote:

 I think a two tiered system would work well.  Officialverified=yes
 perhaps?  I don't think rendering is an issue.  Certainly I've seen JOSM
 used to render or view maps on a lap top for an area.  I was quite
 surprised but the person said an off line map was easily searchable and
 you could select and see all the tags.

 Cheerio John

 On 16 July 2015 at 11:13, Steve Bower st...@worldvista.net
 mailto:st...@worldvista.net wrote:

 A fundamental problem is that the current road/path tagging scheme
 does not distinguish between:

•rough tagging used for remote mapping during activations, and
•detailed tagging based on local knowledge.

 Current tags are used for both, which leads to confusion since the
 custom activation definition may differ somewhat from the
 permanent definition. Also, there is future confusion since the
 level of detail (local knowledge) is not recorded.

 A 2-tier scheme could solve that, with separate tags for rough
 tagging, and detailed tags based on local knowledge.

 Another solution would be a separate tag recording the level of
 certainty or verification, but a 2-tier scheme might be easier to
 manage and to render.

 ~~Steve


 ...



___
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] Flowchart of production

2015-06-20 Thread Steve Bower

Courtney,
This list is for HOT activities. For HOT activations (for crisis response),
remote mappers are invited to map specific features (transportation,
buildings, surface water, etc.) for specific tasks, managed through the HOT
Tasking Manager [1,2], where the instructions point to specific training
materials (e.g., [3]). The process includes validation by more experienced
mappers, and batch data QA steps.

Mapathons are often organized where contributors come together and can get
real-time help from experienced mappers [4].

Outside of HOT, Missing Maps focuses on proactive mapping of the most
vulnerable areas of the world [5]. And the world at large is invited to
contribute to the overall OSM data set.

~~Steve

[1] http://tasks.hotosm.org/
[2] http://learnosm.org/en/beginner/HOT-Remote-Response-Guide/
[3] http://learnosm.org/en/beginner/
[4] http://learnosm.org/en/coordination/remote/
[5] http://www.missingmaps.org/



On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Rieger, Courtney c.rie...@uleth.ca
wrote:

 Hi,
 Can someone please tell me the step by step process of how information is
 gathered by ordinary people to it becoming useful information on a map used
 by NGO's etc?

 Courtney

 ___
 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] very small round objects in project/1048#task/90

2015-05-16 Thread Steve Bower

If it is small and you are uncertain if it is a building, then I would not
trace it as a building (particularly if there are no signs of occupation -
paths or enclosures and such). Even if it is a building, it's most likely a
hut and not significant to the relief effort (or other applications).

Caveat: I didn't view the sample you refer to, but I have seen similar
objects to what you describe.

Steve

On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Pierre Béland pierz...@yahoo.fr wrote:

 When you ask to validate objects like this, try to be more specific. The
 best would be to give us the ID of one of these objects or to zoom in and
 give us the osm url to point more precisely to this zone (Ctrl-J in JOSM).


 Pierre

   --
  *De :* john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com
 *À :* hot@openstreetmap.org hot@openstreetmap.org
 *Envoyé le :* Samedi 16 mai 2015 16h07
 *Objet :* [HOT] very small round objects in project/1048#task/90

 Start at the bottom left and you'll see them in the fields.  I suspect its
 crops drying out they look very small for huts to me.  Some have been
 mapped as buildings.

 Thoughts?

 Thanks John

 ___
 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] Mapping high tension power lines in Nepal

2015-05-14 Thread Steve Bower

The Nepal Electric Authority would likely already have such a map, or
relevant data:
http://www.nea.org.np/

Page 106 of their annual plan has a transmission line map:
http://www.nea.org.np/images/supportive_docs/Annual%20Report-2014.pdf

I did not find anything better in a quick search of their web site, but
they could probably provide something.

Steve


On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Jean-Guilhem Cailton j...@arkemie.com
wrote:

 Hi,

 As you may know, helicopters play a critical role in bringing help to
 Nepalese people affected by April 25 7.8 earthquake, and May 12 7.4
 aftershock, with roads blocked or made dangerous by landslides and
 unstable terrain.

 A USMC helicopter that was taking part in this effort is missing since
 May 12. Other helicopters involved in the search and rescue mission
 report that: A primary concern for ongoing search and rescue efforts is
 unmarked high tension power lines, which have been reported and bisect
 many of the valleys in the search area.

 Some high tension power lines have already been mapped
 (http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/9lx , passed along to those conducting the
 searches). Starting from electrical dams makes it easier to spot them.

 If mappers experienced at mapping power lines could give a hand, this
 would be great. (Or others willing to learn, like me :) ).

 Bing is available for large parts of Nepal. A focus for current search
 and rescue effort is around Ghorthali (27.7517 N  86.0342 E) from where
 a Nepalese local reported seeing a helicopter crash. But of course high
 tension power lines would also be nice to have for Sindhupalchowk,
 Dolakha and other affected districts (see
 http://kathmandulivinglabs.github.io/quake-maps/).

 (Please download and upload OSM data often, in case other mappers work
 on the same theme).

 Thanks,

 Jean-Guilhem


 ___
 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] Fwd: Question on Task #1043 roads

2015-05-14 Thread Steve Bower

Agreed : the project instructions  wiki could use some clarification for
consistency. I can help with that if there's agreement on the tagging
scheme.

The Nepal/Roads Wiki section on tagging rural vehicular highways states,
In practice highway=unclassified is usually the best choice, and
Sometimes highway=track is used, but in Nepal's classification scheme, it
is typically used for agricultural roads.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nepal/Roads#Tagging_rural_vehicular_highways

That differs from project instructions (for several relevant Nepal
projects), which don't mention 'unclassified' and say to use 'track'.

I had been tagging many dirt roads as highway=track, consistent with
instructions and other tiles I had viewed, but now I'm seeing more tiles
using highway=unclassified for such roadways.

Steve

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 7:32 AM, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote:

 Let's avoid to map highway = road since the routing software wont use
 this information.

 Sounds like there is quite a bit of  clean up to do on the highways many
 are tagged road.

 Cheerio John

 On 14 May 2015 at 06:33, Pierre Béland pierz...@yahoo.fr wrote:

 Let's avoid to map highway = road since the routing software wont use
 this information.

 If  road connect villages, indicate minimally highway=tertiary. If
 unpaved, add the tag surface=unpaved.


 Pierre

   --
  *De :* amrit karmacharya amrit...@gmail.com
 *À :* Megha Shrestha meghashrest...@gmail.com
 *Cc :* hot hot@openstreetmap.org
 *Envoyé le :* Jeudi 14 mai 2015 4h50
 *Objet :* Re: [HOT] Fwd: Question on Task #1043 roads

 The appropriate one is highway = road, until it has been verified. If
 they are roughly two lane and long, then use highway = tertiary.

 On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Megha Shrestha meghashrest...@gmail.com
  wrote:



 Hello,

 You can tag the unpaved, but maintained roads between small villages as
 highway = tertiary. You can see the description in
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nepal/Roads

 Thanks,
 Megha






 He, all,

 I read the instructions for tagging roads on Task

 #1043.

 However, there is no tag for roads that fall between
 highway=secondary
 and highway=track. What about the unpaved, but maintained roads between
 small
 villages? These are roads that we might tag highway=unclassified in the
 U.S.
 These roads often are (barely) two lanes. They're definitely larger than
 a typical
 track.
 Do we tag those highway=secondary also?

 Charlotte


 Charlotte Wolter
 927 18th Street Suite A
 Santa Monica, California
 90403
 +1-310-597-4040
 techl...@techlady.com
 Skype: thetechlady



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


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




 --
 Best Regards
 Amrit Karmacharya
 Instructor, Survey Officer
 Land Management Training Center

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

Re: [HOT] Fwd: Question on Task #1043 roads

2015-05-14 Thread Steve Bower

Pierre noted, If  road connect villages, indicate minimally
highway=tertiary. If unpaved, add the tag surface=unpaved.

We might need some guidance on what constitutes a village for this purpose,
for example, minimum number of buildings.

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 6:33 AM, Pierre Béland pierz...@yahoo.fr wrote:

 Let's avoid to map highway = road since the routing software wont use this
 information.

 If  road connect villages, indicate minimally highway=tertiary. If
 unpaved, add the tag surface=unpaved.


 Pierre

   --
  *De :* amrit karmacharya amrit...@gmail.com
 *À :* Megha Shrestha meghashrest...@gmail.com
 *Cc :* hot hot@openstreetmap.org
 *Envoyé le :* Jeudi 14 mai 2015 4h50
 *Objet :* Re: [HOT] Fwd: Question on Task #1043 roads

 The appropriate one is highway = road, until it has been verified. If they
 are roughly two lane and long, then use highway = tertiary.

 On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Megha Shrestha meghashrest...@gmail.com
 wrote:



 Hello,

 You can tag the unpaved, but maintained roads between small villages as
 highway = tertiary. You can see the description in
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Nepal/Roads

 Thanks,
 Megha






 He, all,

 I read the instructions for tagging roads on Task

 #1043.

 However, there is no tag for roads that fall between
 highway=secondary
 and highway=track. What about the unpaved, but maintained roads between
 small
 villages? These are roads that we might tag highway=unclassified in the
 U.S.
 These roads often are (barely) two lanes. They're definitely larger than a
 typical
 track.
 Do we tag those highway=secondary also?

 Charlotte


 Charlotte Wolter
 927 18th Street Suite A
 Santa Monica, California
 90403
 +1-310-597-4040
 techl...@techlady.com
 Skype: thetechlady



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


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




 --
 Best Regards
 Amrit Karmacharya
 Instructor, Survey Officer
 Land Management Training Center

 ___
 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] Worried about task 1018

2015-05-11 Thread Steve Bower

Barbara,
Sounds like you should determine what those 466 deleted elements were
before saving your changeset. Which editor are you using? If you're using
JOSM you can save your changes to a temporary file (File  Save as) to give
yourself time to sort things out. If necessary you could abandon your
changes (so as not to accidentally delete 466 elements) and use the local
temporary saved file to check your work as you re-do the buildings for that
tile.

Steve

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Steve Bower sbo...@gmavt.net wrote:

 Sounds like you should determine what those 466 deleted elements were
 before saving your changeset. Which editor are you using? If you're using
 JOSM you can save your changes to a temporary file (File  Save as) to give
 yourself time to sort things out. If necessary you could abandon your
 changes (so as not to accidentally delete 466 elements) and use the local
 temporary saved file to check your work as you re-do the buildings for that
 tile.


 On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 8:14 AM, piz p...@unical.it wrote:

 probably while editing you have changed/deleted something, and the system
 is telling what you are going to save

 Roberto




  quote of the day ~
 more beer!
 (Big Wednesday - 1978)



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

Re: [HOT] What is the etiquette on breaking up tasks? (New Mapper working on Nepal #1018)

2015-05-10 Thread Steve Bower

Tom - Another option is to leave a comment if you plan to return to the
tile within, say, several to 12 hours. I have done that because I find I'm
more efficient once I've become familiar with a tile (which imagery has
good enough quality to help with interpretation, where the roads  rivers
are, how existing OSM features were mapped by others before me, etc.).
Familiarity with the tile makes me more efficient, so I prefer not to break
it up if I know I can come back and finish it.

Steve

On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 5:11 AM, Nirab Pudasaini developer.ni...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Hi tom,

 If you are having hard time completing a task it is a good idea to break
 it up, but just dont get carried away. :D

 On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Tom Ayerst tom.aye...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi,

 I am finding it hard to finish a task at the current tile size (even the
 smaller ones) and would find it easier to break them down into much smaller
 tasks that I can concentrate on and complete ready for validation. At the
 moment I am have to go back to a tile several times to get close to
 completing.

 Is there an etiquette about this? Are validators happy to work at a finer
 level of granularity? Or does this make something else harder?

 Thanks

 Tom

 ___
 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] [info-hotosm] Reference Project #1030 Nepal Earthquake

2015-05-09 Thread Steve Bower

Spring,
When I talk about moving the imagery that is only to align it with Bing
imagery as I work in a very localized area, in order to confirm that the
features are (roughly) correctly located, relative to Bing. It does not
change the geo-referencing of the underlying data for other users - it is
only revising it for my display. I expect that how you understood it, but
in case that wasn't clear.

I haven't personally digitized anything from the DG imagery. I have only
used it to help with interpretation where the Bing imagery is poor (low res
or cloudy). But others may be locating features from the DG imagery -
hopefully only experienced mappers with careful reference to better
geo-rectified imagery (hopefully being the aspect that gives us all
concern, of course).

I fully agree this is not best practice for digital mapping - it's best
available within resource constraints for crisis response.

By the way, you may already be very familiar with this, but the elevation
aspect of ortho-rectification is described here (see image at top-right):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthophoto. Or see the first image in this
page: http://www.kevinroper.org/portfolio/ . These explain why the more
severe off-nadir angle causes greater location distortion, more difficult
to correct for.



On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 10:30 AM, Kevin Bullock kbull...@digitalglobe.com
wrote:

 Does Digital Globe supply Bing images?  Just curious, they are always
 referred to as different products.

 Yes, Microsoft licenses DigitalGlobe imagery for many parts of the world,
 you’ll notice the attribution in the Bing Maps platform. In various
 threads, I’ve seen Bing imagery “versus” DigitalGlobe imagery, and that is
 usually a contradiction. The proper way of characterizing it is:
 DigitalGlobe imagery through the Bing platform versus DigitalGlobe imagery
 being made available during this crisis.
 https://www.digitalglobe.com/partners/platform-partners/microsoft

 Cheers, Kevin


 This electronic communication and any attachments may contain confidential
 and proprietary information of DigitalGlobe, Inc. If you are not the
 intended recipient, or an agent or employee responsible for delivering this
 communication to the intended recipient, or if you have received this
 communication in error, please do not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate
 or otherwise use the information. Please indicate to the sender that you
 have received this communication in error, and delete the copy you received.

 DigitalGlobe reserves the right to monitor any electronic communication
 sent or received by its employees, agents or representatives.

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

Re: [HOT] [info-hotosm] Reference Project #1030 Nepal Earthquake

2015-05-08 Thread Steve Bower

 availability. In our orthorectification process, we are
 leveraging a variety of elevation models. Important to note that most
 elevation models have linear error that can range from 5-15m. [4] As the
 off nadir angle increases, these inaccuracies in the elevation model
 propagate into horizontal displacements in the imagery. This is why we are
 seeing large offsets.
 4) The tradeoff here is timely, massive amounts of post event imagery
 acquired under less than ideal circumstances containing horizontal error,
 or, very limited imagery only collected under ideal circumstances with
 minimal horizontal error. As noted below, typically, the former is
 preferred.

 Hope this helps, Kevin

 [1] - https://www.mapbox.com/blog/nepal-imagery-collection/
 [2] - http://www.landinfo.com/buying-optical-satellite-imagery-2.html
 [3] -
 https://www.digitalglobe.com/sites/default/files/WorldView_Geolocation_Accuracy.pdf
 [4] - http://www.satimagingcorp.com/services/orthorectification/

 *From:* Steve Bower [ mailto:sbo...@gmavt.net sbo...@gmavt.net]
 *Sent:* Thursday, May 07, 2015 10:49 AM
 *To:* Milo van der Linden
 *Cc:* Heather Leson; i...@hotosm.org; Ross Taylor; HOT@OSM (Humanitarian
 OpenStreetMap Team)
 *Subject:* Re: [HOT] [info-hotosm] Reference Project #1030 Nepal
 Earthquake

 Springfield,
 You raise important points, and are not raining on a parade. The
 resulting data will not be suitable for all purposes, but it can be very
 useful for this crisis response.

 I do think there is significant risk that some mappers will map directly
 from un-rectified imagery, and introduce problematic location errors. That
 needs to be minimized, e.g., through clear instructions and good
 validation. I think there's room for improvement on the instructions, e.g.,
 it would be good to have a wiki page on mapping from un-rectified imagery
 in combination with rectified imagery, for crisis response.

 Thanks

 On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 5:14 AM, Milo van der Linden m...@dogodigi.net
 wrote:
 Hello Springfield Harrison,
 As a 20 year GIS veteran I understand what you say. I do agree that in
 communication with first responders it is important to have them clearly
 understand that the accuracy of features can be off ~100m. But for them
 having maps that give a good indication is way better then having no maps
 at all. In the end, and that is what I hope for, it can save lives.
 I have a long running discussion with y'olde GIS community on how can a
 map created by amateurs be better then what we professionals do?. It is my
 opinion that it can be. I believe that the many are smarter than the few
 (quote by James Surowiecki). And the HOT tasks have all the ingredients to
 succeed:
 1. There is diversity of opinion
 2. People involved in the mapping process have opinions not influenced by
 those around them
 3. People operate decentralized
 The only thing that might need more attention (and this is where
 geospatial experts can take their role) is that HOT and openstreetmap as a
 whole could use more mechanisms to turn all these little private
 judgements into collective quality. This process could involve analysing
 quantity and different representations of the same feature through time. In
 that way, you could see the mapping activity (in dense area's) as GPS.
 There are faults, influenced by methodology, opinion and conditions. And as
 a GPS professional, you know that it is _knowing the error_ that
 automagically creates accuracy. I would love the GIS/GPS community to think
 about how to know the error in community mapping.
 I love this new way of mapping. It creates new opportunities. It involves
 new ways of thinking. It is not influenced by what GIS people say GIS
 should be like.
 Kind regards, with respect,
 Milo


  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds

 2015-05-07 10:21 GMT+02:00 Springfield Harrison stellar...@gmail.com :
 Hello Steve,

 Sorry to rain on the parade yet again but I find this matter of
 image alignment to be puzzling and concerning.

 One of the first things I learned when embarking upon GIS/GPS
 mapping was that accurate georeferencing of all layers, but especially the
 base layers (imagery in this case) was sacrosanct. If things are not in
 their correct point in space, what use is that to the end user? Especially
 in rugged terrain, with difficult access and rapidly changing stream flows,
 it is important to know where a trail or road really is. Why try to cross a
 raging torrent when you don't need to?

 Having untrained users realign the imagery willy-nilly is amazing
 to me. What faith can anyone have in the new tracings if the earth is
 literally moving every time a new user opens up the file? Accurate map
 datums and projections were created for a reason.

 How is it that, ...the DigitalGlobe 2015-05-03 (DG) images have
 had minimal georectification.. This is bizarre, this is not GIS, this is
 merely sketching. Why is such imagery being offered and accepted

Re: [HOT] slow time mapper productivity

2015-05-08 Thread Steve Bower

I agree. In my opinion JOSM is not much harder to learn than iD. I question
why it has its reputation. It has many more menus and tools but I don't
think that is a deterrent to learning the basics and getting started.

The installation instructions could be better, and for different operating
systems - that could be easily fixed.

For tracing buildings I would not require JOSM, but would more strongly
recommend it in task instructions.

Steve

On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 7:45 PM, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote:

 This is definitely slow time and not something to distract HOT at the
 moment.

 Mapping buildings is not my favourite occupation.  I reward myself by
 breaking off and sending the odd email etc from time to time so the figures
 below are not head down hard mapping of buildings.

 However I noticed that in a one hour session in Nepal I mapped around six
 hundred buildings using JOSM building_tool including one or two odd shaped
 ones shiftJ thanks to Blake's video.

 If I look at the tiles I'm working on I see that half the mappers only map
 twenty buildings or less and there aren't that many mappers mapping over a
 hundred buildings in a tile.

 Does it matter?  If we were paying mappers for their time then yes it
 would, we aren't but even so think how much more quickly we could complete
 projects with the same resources and we won't even talk about data quality
 issues.

 I understand that JOSM has acquired a reputation for being hard to teach
 and use by some but perhaps with suitable guidelines we can get a bit more
 productivity out of our mappers?

 Cheerio John

 ___
 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] Missing Maps Training Video Suggestions

2015-05-07 Thread Steve Bower

A few thoughts on the training materials, from a 2-week OSM user and
long-time GIS user:

I have not yet found the single, systematically organized portal for
access to all training materials events, This would be great to have, and
other training references could point back to it. The closest I have found
is the HOT Training working group, current sources and materials:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team/Working_groups/Training#Current_Sources_.26_Materials

But, for example, that page does not point to How to get started
contributing to a HOT task:
https://gist.github.com/meetar/b9929dfec129d1d7f5f2

So yes, Suzan, I think organization and production of comprehensive
training material is a great idea - thank you. I think getting the top-down
organization right is key. It seems this would be guided by the HOT
Training working group (is there a general OSM training working group?).

Existing training materials on how to use OSM and the editors is fairly
comprehensive, but somewhat scattered. Multiple sources overlap in the
material they cover. An OSM/HOT training portal would help identify gaps
and guide where new material (including new videos) is needed.

Training on how to interpret features from imagery is minimal. This could
really be expanded, with examples of special cases, especially for
poor-quality imagery where interpretation is difficult. Interpretation
issues seem to dominate a lot of quality concerns and newbie questions.

I don't think it's reasonable to expect new mappers to be able to take
quick start training and jump into contributing, at least for those who
have not mapped before. For HOT response in particular, I think the
expectation should be that mappers should expect to invest at least a day
of on-line training before starting to contribute. Yes, that would turn
away some mappers, but with the benefit of fewer quality issues. Yes, you
can learn to trace buildings in far less time, but many mappers soon
confront more complex tasks and a better training foundation would serve
them well. (My opinion on this may evolve...)

Cheers,
Steve

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 5:24 AM, Suzan Reed su...@suzanreed.com wrote:

Althio and all.

I don't understand the shared document format, and don't find it an easy
place to express these views, nor do I understand where I could add to it
in a constructive way. That's why I expressed my thoughts here, so that
someone who understands the shared document format could incorporate these
thoughts if they are useful.

I'm sure Im not the only newbie who has the same exact feelings and
thoughts. We all want to do a good job, we all want concise, well done
training that gets us going quickly, we all want to contribute to a
healthy, successful project that helps people. I hope leadership can find
people and resources to make good training available.

So far, like Spring, I'm a bit confused. Are my hours of work going to do
any good for the people who live in the hundreds of houses I've mapped? I
hope so. Fingers crossed.

All that said, as a designer and writer expert in technical documenting, I
would be happy to help with the production of a comprehensive set of
training tools. Small group, hopefully? I'm also adept at working in a
global environment, cross culturally. Use me if you wish.

Suzan

On May 7, 2015, at 12:44 AM, althio wrote:

Suzan,

As you are interested to help with these 1-min video: please join the
shared document, read it and update it.

There's a shared doc here, where we're collecting ideas for the
individual modules. Please feel free to add your thoughts and, even
better, to encourage newbies to identify where there are most needs
for training materials...

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mo82sCLLnP30SsgRO1VIpGxezWcQhAQ_HxEpCEPh89o/edit?usp=sharing

Your other comments (about current training) are certainly valid but
this is not the best thread for that.

Cheers,

- althio

On 7 May 2015 at 09:30, Suzan Reed su...@suzanreed.com wrote:
Training
My major problem with the current training, it's long, boring, and slow.
A Quick Start Guide would be perfect for someone like me. A video with this
information would be great. I could not go through the training because it
went too slow, so I missed some information, but found the process for
someone like me who works in Photoshop pretty easy and intuitive, but I'm
not a usual newbie.

An orientation video for the area being mapped.
I don't think many mappers know what buildings in remote areas of Nepal
look like, or that villages are spread out over a big area, or that paths
just end and do not connect in rural Nepal. A video with still and moving
images I believe would be a big help. People could then see buildings are
not square, built out of piles of rocks, and are often two stories tall
with animals below and people above. Roofs are tin, or packed earth. If
mappers could see this I think they would do a

Re: [HOT] [info-hotosm] Reference Project #1030 Nepal Earthquake

2015-05-07 Thread Steve Bower

Springfield,
You raise important points, and are not raining on a parade. The
resulting data will not be suitable for all purposes, but it can be very
useful for this crisis response.

I do think there is significant risk that some mappers will map directly
from un-rectified imagery, and introduce problematic location errors. That
needs to be minimized, e.g., through clear instructions and good
validation. I think there's room for improvement on the instructions, e.g.,
it would be good to have a wiki page on mapping from un-rectified imagery
in combination with rectified imagery, for crisis response.

Thanks

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 5:14 AM, Milo van der Linden m...@dogodigi.net
wrote:

 Hello Springfield Harrison,

 As a 20 year GIS veteran I understand what you say. I do agree that in
 communication with first responders it is important to have them clearly
 understand that the accuracy of features can be off ~100m. But for them
 having maps that give a good indication is way better then having no maps
 at all. In the end, and that is what I hope for, it can save lives.

 I have a long running discussion with y'olde GIS community on how can a
 map created by amateurs be better then what we professionals do?. It is my
 opinion that it can be. I believe that the many are smarter than the few
 (quote by James Surowiecki). And the HOT tasks have all the ingredients to
 succeed:

 1. There is diversity of opinion
 2. People involved in the mapping process have opinions not influenced by
 those around them
 3. People operate decentralized

 The only thing that might need more attention (and this is where
 geospatial experts can take their role) is that HOT and openstreetmap as a
 whole could use more mechanisms to turn all these little private
 judgements into collective quality. This process could involve analysing
 quantity and different representations of the same feature through time. In
 that way, you could see the mapping activity (in dense area's) as GPS.
 There are faults, influenced by methodology, opinion and conditions. And as
 a GPS professional, you know that it is _knowing the error_ that
 automagically creates accuracy. I would love the GIS/GPS community to think
 about how to know the error in community mapping.

 I love this new way of mapping. It creates new opportunities. It involves
 new ways of thinking. It is not influenced by what GIS people say GIS
 should be like.

 Kind regards, with respect,

 Milo


 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds

 2015-05-07 10:21 GMT+02:00 Springfield Harrison stellar...@gmail.com:

  Hello Steve,

 Sorry to rain on the parade yet again but I find this matter of
 image alignment to be puzzling and concerning.

 One of the first things I learned when embarking upon GIS/GPS
 mapping was that accurate georeferencing of all layers, but especially the
 base layers (imagery in this case) was sacrosanct.  If things are not in
 their correct point in space, what use is that to the end user?  Especially
 in rugged terrain, with difficult access and rapidly changing stream flows,
 it is important to know where a trail or road really is.  Why try to cross
 a raging torrent when you don't need to?

 Having untrained users realign the imagery willy-nilly is
 amazing to me.  What faith can anyone have in the new tracings if the earth
 is literally moving every time a new user opens up the file?  Accurate map
 datums and projections were created for a reason.

 How is it that, ...the DigitalGlobe 2015-05-03 (DG) images have
 had minimal georectification..  This is bizarre, this is not GIS, this is
 merely sketching.  Why is such imagery being offered and accepted?  I know
 that this is a major emergency but then all the more need for quality data.

 However, I am newly arrived, and it seems that most people are
 content with a world that can be up to 200 m out of whack.  I'm not sure if
 I can contribute much under the circumstances other than this gloomy
 criticism.  Sorry, will try not to dampen the enthusiasm further.

  Thanks for your patience, Cheers . . . . . . . . Spring



 At 06-05-2015 11:59 Wednesday, Steve Bower wrote:

 Ross - If you haven't already, see the recent threads on data alignment
 to satellite imagery and imagery alignment, in the archives for May:
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/2015-May/thread.htmlÂ

 Note some links pointed out there by althio:
 Â http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Using_ImageryÂ
 Â http://learnosm.org/en/editing/correcting-imagery-offset/Â

 Because the DigitalGlobe 2015-05-03 (DG) images have had minimal
 georectification (needed mainly for elevation distortion), they may be
 offset by 100m or more. On one tile (5.5km wide) I saw offsets relative to
 Bing of 125m to the west and, elsewhere, 85m to the east. The offsets may
 vary considerable even in nearby areas, especially in steep terrain.Â

 You should align your work with Bing imagery

Re: [HOT] Should Newbies (Me) keep mapping houses and easy features?

2015-05-04 Thread Steve Bower

Laura,
Blue and red-roofed buildings are not necessarily aid tents. Many buildings
have blue roofs, and some red as well, from my experience. So I think
there's no need to tag buildings based on roof color.

Are you tracing buildings from post-quake imagery, where you would expect
to see aid tents? I think the post-quake imagery is only being used for
experienced mappers only tasks. The Bing and MapBox imagery was from
before the earthquake.

Cheers,
Steve

On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 4:08 PM, Pierre Béland pierz...@yahoo.fr wrote:

 Laura,

 we should come back with more jobs to do. A lot of activity at technical
 problems to look at the same time by the core team. Plus we are in various
 timezones - Asia - Europe - America.

 Yes tracing individual buildings is always useful, including in the
 Kathmandu urban area.


 Pierre

   --
  *De :* laura brittain l.n.britt...@gmail.com
 *À :* hot@openstreetmap.org
 *Envoyé le :* Lundi 4 mai 2015 14h36
 *Objet :* [HOT] Should Newbies (Me) keep mapping houses and easy
 features?

 Since a lot of work now needs to be done by more experienced mappers, is
 it still helpful for newbies like me to trace houses and other easy
 features?
 Does seeing every building in an area (especially isolated buildings) help
 with rescue and aid?
 A lot of these buildings seem really hard to get to, so if they're mapped
 it would seem that they won't be overlooked, but I wanted to check.

 Question 2:
 Should blue and red-roofed buildings be marked, and if so, as buildings?
 They are aid tents, right?

 I'm sure I'm like thousands of newbs who are eager, dying, to help but not
 wanting to waste time on unimportant tasks.
 Please advise.

 Thanks,
 Laura







 ___
 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] What constitutes an experienced mapper?

2015-05-03 Thread Steve Bower

How much does prior experience count toward being an experienced mapper
for HOT work?

I have one week of experience with OSM/JOSM, working on basic Nepal tasks,
plus much prior GIS experience. I would be glad to contribute to
experienced mapper tasks, as needed, if there's a protocol (informal?)
for recognizing prior experience.

I have 12 years of GIS experience, including as a U.S. state GIS Database
Administrator, application developer, and GIS-based master's thesis. I have
spent 5 wonderful months in Nepal, mostly trekking.

However, I'm still learning HOT processes, how decisions are made,
validation processes  tools, how data are used in the field, etc. I would
be sure to ask for help rather than plow ahead when uncertain.

Sorry to interrupt more pressing business, but glad to contribute at a
higher level as needed.

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

Re: [HOT] Experienced mapper please verify: nonexistent stream on Task #1955, other mistakes

2015-05-03 Thread Steve Bower

Regarding residential areas, it would be very helpful to understand how
these residential area polygons will be used. For example:

 For digital and/or printed maps show residential areas at small scale and
individual buildings at large scale
 Distinguish between areas of residential concentration
(landuse=residential) and areas of scattered habitation
 Compute building density by residential area polygon, to estimate
population density and target relief efforts
 etc.

Knowing more about how data will be used would be useful for all
contributors, and may encourage more contributions.

A few examples (with images) provided with the task instructions would be
very helpful - but I understand the time constraints.

Thanks

On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Suzan Reed su...@suzanreed.com wrote:

 In Nepal villages can be spread out over very large areas. In Nepal a
 village is often not a tight group of buildings. An area as large as a half
 a mile wide will all relate as a village. Small clusters of buildings can
 be one family, or a monastery, but people 500, even 1000 meters away are
 neighbors in that village.

 So what do we do with large areas of houses and buildings spread out over
 a 1000 ft area…in Nepal?


 On May 2, 2015, at 4:19 PM, Pierre Béland wrote:

 Dont forget that we work to locate people at risk after 8 days without any
 relief. People have lost everything under the houses ruins including food.
 It is important to report all the residential areas to assure to provide
 them relief.

 We should remove the instructions 20 or so. Did not notice. This is
 valuable if you trace all buildings under clusters of 20. Isolated areas,
 even under 20 houses should be reported too.
 regard

 Pierre

 De : Kretzer kret...@gmx.net
 À : Suzan Reed su...@suzanreed.com
 Cc : HOT@openstreetmap.org hot@openstreetmap.org
 Envoyé le : Samedi 2 mai 2015 19h07
 Objet : Re: [HOT] Experienced mapper please verify: nonexistent stream on
 Task #1955, other mistakes

 Hi again, I just noticed Emmor beat me to the answer ...
 I wanted to ad that it can be useful to look at the history of changes in
 a case like this. Sometime I do this to make sure if the other person
 possibly had more recent information (or local knowledge, as there was a
 lot of mapping activity in Nepal in the last years - in some areas I have
 seen many edits by users with Nepalese sounding names).

 You can find the history if you change to the map view and click on the
 History tab on the top. In this case there were several very new users
 contributing.

 As to the residential areas, I would draw the line around the larger
 clusters of buildings and leave the others outside. The instructions in
 this project specify that it should be around 20 or so buildings.
 Mappers' styles vary, personally I don't like the tiny residential areas.
 The important thing is that the buildings are there, so that rescuers can
 see were people are living.




  Gesendet: Sonntag, 03. Mai 2015 um 00:47 Uhr
  Von: Suzan Reed su...@suzanreed.com
  An: Kretzer kret...@gmx.net
  Betreff: Re: Aw: [HOT] Experienced mapper please verify: nonexistent
 stream on Task #1955, other mistakes
 
  Hi,
 
  I questioned the large areas, yet villages in Nepal are really spread
 out over big areas. I'm not sure what to do but to leave them for not and
 wait.
 
  Suzan
  Portland, Oregon USA
 
 
  On May 2, 2015, at 3:42 PM, Kretzer wrote:
 
  Hi Susan,
  zooming out you can see that this is at the bottom of a quite large
 valley, so it is very likely that there is a stream, even if it isn't
 clearly visible. Maybe the person who drew it was using different imagery.
 I think it's not in the right place in the middle section (near the mapped
 path), but I would prolong it to the river in the east. it's not the most
 important feature at the moment, though.
 
  What disturbs me more in the tile are the huge residential areas - those
 boundaries should be close to the buildings. They are also overlapping in
 one place, and there is an area within an area in the western part. Both
 shouldn't happen.
 
  I'm just a semi-noob myself, but I am quite sure about these questions.
 
 
 
   Gesendet: Sonntag, 03. Mai 2015 um 00:02 Uhr
   Von: Suzan Reed su...@suzanreed.com
   An: HOT@openstreetmap.org hot@openstreetmap.org
   Betreff: [HOT] Experienced mapper please verify: nonexistent stream on
 Task #1955, other mistakes
  
   Someone with advanced mapping experience, please review.
  
   There isn't a stream at the locations listed below. Seem to be lots of
 mistakes on this task. Might be new information, or?
  
   #1018 - Nepal Earthquake, 2015, detailed mapping 2nd pass
  
   Task #1955
  
   http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=id#map=20/28.08949/84.74058
  
   http://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=id#map=16/28.0890/84.7460
  
   PLEASE ADVISE ME ON WHAT TO DO WITH THIS TASK.
   ___
   HOT mailing list
   HOT@openstreetmap.org

Re: [HOT] Duties before start.

2015-05-01 Thread Steve Bower

Fátima,
Welcome, thanks for pitching in to help. I am also fairly new to HOT but
here are a few thoughts:

Take the tutorials before starting, and the additional training recommended
from them:
http://mapgive.state.gov/learn-to-map/
http://learnosm.org/en/

Review the validated work of others before starting, to understand what's
expected for the project. I review it in iD so I don't have to lock it from
anyone else (I use JOSM to edit).

I suggest reviewing the descriptions and instructions for several projects
in the area you've chosen (e.g., Nepal). Some project instructions are more
complete than others.

If the instructions aren't clear to you, request clarification.

Start with tiles that have fewer features to be mapped, so that you can be
validated sooner and get feedback on your work. When you check your work
back in you can leave a comment noting your are new, note anything you were
unsure of, and request feedback on your work.

Don't validate others' work - leave that to experienced mappers.

Be systematic in your review of a tile. I start with major transportation
features, then work systematically scanning the tile in columns,
top-to-bottom, then left-to-right, at a constant scale, using keyboard
shortcuts to move (Ctrl-arrow in JOSM) so that I'm sure I've covered the
complete tile.

If you are entering buildings be sure to load the buildings_tools plugin
for JOSM:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/BuildingsTools

Use this mail list to ask questions as you go. Let us know what project
you're working on. If appropriate include a link (e.g., the URL in iD, or
the lat/long coordinates) to show an example.

If you're in doubt of whether you are doing something right, ask questions
first. New users can make good contributions, but some new users are
problematic and there is much debate as to how to enable new users while
assuring good quality.

Steve

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Fátima Vale mfgv...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi :)

 I am beginner here (it is my first time..) I am having some doubts before
 start mapping and I need some help please.

 I have my work area and I am using JOMS. I didn't have any alert about the
 image offset. So, I can start without problems?

 Tks, :)

 Fátima

 ___
 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] limit validation to experienced users

2015-05-01 Thread Steve Bower

Regarding tracing buildings in #1018, Nepal 2nd pass, the *revised*
instructions are unambiguous:

*Buildings *- Trace ALL individual buildings and tag it as building=yes.
For clusters of building, DO NOT enclose the whole area as one building. It
is important to trace individual structures for future damage analysis.

I have been doing so, even in areas already tagged landuse=residential. If
tracing all individual buildings is incorrect, let me know and the
instructions should be revised.

I would expect consistency of instructions across the Nepal projects, e.g.,
regarding how to add buildings. An experienced project manager might want
to review the Nepal project instructions for consistency/completeness (if
not done already).

Feedback from validators would be very helpful, whether all good or for
future do this.

Thanks



On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Julian Haag o...@juhaag.de wrote:


 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA1

 Hi,
 I had an argument with him too via PM and I kinda ticked a bit.. Felt a
 bit strange getting a lesson from someone mapping for 3 months and
 adding all in all 9000 nodes and having added about 100.000 in Nepal
 this year myself. Invalidating tasks completed by maning added some
 flavour to that one too.. :D
 He wants all buildings to be mapped. Even those in landuse=residential.

 It feels like a waste of time, but the instructions are a bit ambiguous
 so technically he is not wrong!
 I can understand, that completing and validating a task should be the
 point in wich everything needed is mapped - #1018 is marked as STEP 2.
 So we are adding more details.. I am not sure what to do, but I pointed
 out to him, that his attitude might discourage some mappers (as it did
 to me at first (only a bit :D)).

 greetings from germany
 ngt

 P.S. at the moment I try to watch the activities and (re-)validate
 especially the ones done by beginners. In the comments there has to be a
 kind and more exhausting text on what to do, point out learnosm and be
 particular, what should be done different or be better. Try to avoid
 saying what is bad ;)


 Am 30.04.2015 um 16:51 schrieb Kretzer:
  Makes sense to me ...
 
  In task #1018 there seems to be a user with little experience and lots
 of confidence invalidating dozens of tiles, arguing that every
 individual structure needs to be traced.
  The person even entered in a kind if edit war with maning. I really
 feel this is a waste of precious time.
 
  In this tasks there are very specific instructions on how to validate
 (which is a very good idea!).
  They do clearly say that the major highways need to be there, not all
 the highways.
 
  I guess the goal is to get the relevant structures as quickly as
 possible. That kind of nitpicking seems to be just slowing the job.
 
 
  Gesendet mit der GMX iPhone AppIFFK
 
  Am 30.04.15 um 15:49 schrieb Pierre GIRAUD
 
  Hi all,
 
  I wasn't able to read all the email I got for the last 3 days, and
  there's a ton of those.
 
  However, I've seen a lot of people complaining about beginner mappers
  validating tasks even if they're not experienced enough to do so.
  Before we find a way to avoid this with additions to the tasking
  manager, I think there may be a workaround.
 
  What about making the (100% done) projects in a private mode
  temporarily and give access to a limited list of users so that they
  can validate the done tasks.
 
  This could be used for this project for example:
  http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/1008
 
  This would prevent beginners to come to this project, wonder what to
  do and then validate tasks even if they don't know what they're doing.
 
  My 2 cents.
 
  Pierre
 
  --
  -
| Pierre GIRAUD
  -
 
  ___
  HOT mailing list
  HOT@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
 
  ___
  HOT mailing list
  HOT@openstreetmap.org
  https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
 Version: GnuPG v2

 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVQ6WqAAoJEMUCiYazPkhKgBcP/09YmyKW4fzupreyDvd7rp36
 TZkG0G6gPPL3Wu+GmOpb+xznT04Mz4oBUAJDt6JvxlxK8y0QrcUdl1BY9xSzPK8N
 +DGZ8R6boogYNqcifhxpaBF7estqMq7PnfJxzppVwEygX0RxABSrolwm4ZXr7giK
 lbq1k3EczfEhXrvULTUNfT06fqnDksn62ga/SwYZGen0oMCsgrrQA7H6u8F5hMx2
 yS73keCnxdZ9nbJlxOT4wPHK3DuAs7QWgsiBGAOQEu8ytA9gkAe4LRqJIpQWxVdR
 WAb9BfaQk1FQ393GvHfGP3K+fI25MfT5B0aLxAOQYDREUNjzbKlnxudTK++p5V3R
 sIpVCKpiP4jDhOPkMXPbSMETkBw55BXC913C2kvEq54RXgQMw7C+EbvIlxKeDJ2O
 frOIngIyT+eqNMUnQOe/Tuvn9h3R5Gcx/3qBIeZLI8vwslbIpDs9a2XKsbutp/xk
 tcsjpqEhyhmY0Fw81VM+H29PeemUzo1IHArYY2eyb4lBhWy8gw3qnvsTSvp9JSu1
 I1fQLN0MQLihh3wC8A4uWKcRTRPf8MSmv72mQjg52gSE2HqAvmB0r3fQLaku5ZX4
 KQE8PtKM5BEITd5Xw12yFQa27kwqL0pXqrDjiRzVRIBehp2Gq/1L7xia88Yi1A1B
 Rt+l7Mncu3UBWIjNRHtN
 =4rz2
 -END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [HOT] Remote area mapping, clouds, six questions

2015-04-30 Thread Steve Bower

Suzan - I would like to hear from others. Here are my newbie thoughts:

ONE  Small structures that may not be houses:
This may depend on the project. For #1018, Nepal Detailed Mapping 2nd Pass,
the instructions are to tag buildings as building=yes rather than as
'house'. So I have included some small buildings that may not be houses. In
a village with many obvious houses I include less of the smaller buildings,
which is inconsistent but seems reasonable given the time crunch.

TWO  Geologic structures that may appear to be buildings:
I make a judgement call on these, but if I can't distinguish straight edges
then I generally don't include it.

THREE  Changing other's work
I have changed others' work. For example, a way tagged as highway=track
when it really appears to be just a path, I may change it to 'path'.
However, I check the tags first to see if there's a source, in which case I
don't change it. I correct triangle buildings as they could be confusing
(the JOSM buildings_tools plugin does make it much easier to enter
rectangular buildings).

FOUR  Exact building shape
For larger buildings with unusual shape I correctly entered the shape. But
generally I just put in a rectangle for what I assume is the main building.
I put myself in the position of the map user - if they can figure out which
building is which, I figure that's enough.

FIVE  Residential vs. all houses marked
Project #1018 *revised* instructions are explicit: Trace ALL individual
buildings and tag it as building=yes. For clusters of building, DO NOT
enclose the whole area as one building. It is important to trace individual
structures for future damage analysis. So I have been correcting enclosed
'residential' areas with no building outlines. Your project may differ, but
I would expect consistency across most Nepal mapping projects.

SIX  Up to date BING images?
Good question - the imagery date is apparently not available for some
imagery (odd). I have read that the JOSM context (right-click) menu option
to Show Tile Info will show the Bing imagery date, but it does not work
for me. When I Show Tile Info nothing happens. This link indicates it
should show the capture date:
http://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/8573

Steve

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 7:52 PM, john whelan jwhelan0...@gmail.com wrote:

 small buildings building=yes, let some on the ground say its a house etc.

 If a building is not a triangle then change it to a rectangle.  JOSM
 building tool is fast and very easy to use.

 Some projects want all buildings, some want residential areas and
 highways, all buildings are nice but there is a lot of ground to cover so
 read the instructions first, if you can get away with residential areas
 rather than buildings according to the instructions go for the residential
 areas and get more ground mapped in the same time.

 Cheerio John

 On 30 April 2015 at 19:39, Suzan Reed su...@suzanreed.com wrote:


 ONE  Small structures/houses
 In remote areas, lightly populated, it's difficult to see if a small
 structure is a house or something else. I am labeling them all house. Is
 this correct? People live in tiny places in Nepal, less that 25' square.
 They are hard to discern. If it looks like a building, I mark it as a
 house. Is this good?

 TWO  Geologic structures
 It is difficult to tell geologic structures from houses in some cases. I
 look to see if there are similar structures in the landscape, if there are
 fields or agriculture, then mark it as a house as I have been erring on the
 side of marking houses and having people recognized as being there than
 not. I want everyone on the map. This may mean I've made mistakes and it's
 a huge boulder with a shadow. Comments?

 THREE  Changing other's work
 Also, some of my colleagues have marked houses with triangles, not
 rectangles. Can I correct these?

 FOUR  Exact building shape
 Is the shape of the building important? It's often difficult to tell if
 it's part of the house or an outbuilding or a shed near the house. Knowing
 there are people living there seems more important, but if the actual shape
 is important, I will go back and redo my work.

 FIVE  Residential vs. all houses marked
 Many remote villages are simply marked with a polygon Residential Area.
 Should I add the structures to these areas?

 SIX  Up to date BING images?
 Also, how recent are the Bing images? In remote areas, much could have
 been lost to landslides. I also come across areas with clouds. I can go
 back and map these if the images are refreshed.



 ___
 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] How to handle existing features for #1018 Nepal task

2015-04-30 Thread Steve Bower

I'm working on project #1081 Nepal detailed mapping 2nd pass. I'm new to
OSM but have lots of GIS experience.

Not sure how best to handle existing features already in the data (either
from the 1st pass, or predating the project)

(1) The instructions say do not trace all the paths in the fields or small
paths of a few hundred meters that do not connect to road networks. If
there are existing paths like that in the data, should I delete them?

(2) An existing long way tagged highway=track appears to start as a track
that could support motorized vehicles (2 tire tracks are visible), but soon
becomes very difficult to distinguish and is perhaps impassible. I'm
guessing it was traced from different imagery (I checked Bing and MapBox,
per the instructions) - I would not have traced much of it - too hard to
see. Should I split this long way and label the second part
'highway=unclassified' or similar?

(3) Some small hamlets of 5-10 buildings, accessible only by paths, are
enclosed in existing 'landuse=residential' polygons. The validation
instructions are to confirm there are highways connecting 'residential'
areas, and that there are 'residential' polygons around clusters of 20 or
so houses. Should I remove the 'residential' polygons around tiny hamlets
that are not on roads?

(By the way, I read the GH! thread and agree with Stacey and others
that more detailed project instructions would be one key way to improve
quality and consistency, especially from new users. My questions reflect
the sort of basic examples that could be part of more detailed
instructions. Being a new user with fresh eyes, I could help with that -
but that's a different thread.)

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

Re: [HOT] How to become a validator (a suggestion)

Re: [HOT] Fwd: Accuracy ( international women's day)

Re: [HOT] Tagging hut=yes

Re: [HOT] Validation

Re: [HOT] [HOT Training] Re: LearnOSM Glossary

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

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

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

Re: [HOT] Flowchart of production

Re: [HOT] very small round objects in project/1048#task/90

Re: [HOT] Mapping high tension power lines in Nepal

Re: [HOT] Fwd: Question on Task #1043 roads

Re: [HOT] Fwd: Question on Task #1043 roads

Re: [HOT] Worried about task 1018

Re: [HOT] What is the etiquette on breaking up tasks? (New Mapper working on Nepal #1018)

Re: [HOT] [info-hotosm] Reference Project #1030 Nepal Earthquake

Re: [HOT] [info-hotosm] Reference Project #1030 Nepal Earthquake

Re: [HOT] slow time mapper productivity

Re: [HOT] Missing Maps Training Video Suggestions

Re: [HOT] [info-hotosm] Reference Project #1030 Nepal Earthquake

Re: [HOT] Should Newbies (Me) keep mapping houses and easy features?

[HOT] What constitutes an experienced mapper?

Re: [HOT] Experienced mapper please verify: nonexistent stream on Task #1955, other mistakes

Re: [HOT] Duties before start.

Re: [HOT] limit validation to experienced users

Re: [HOT] Remote area mapping, clouds, six questions

[HOT] How to handle existing features for #1018 Nepal task

27 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information