[HOT] validating tiles

[Daniel Specht]

Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could be
because
(A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
(B) people don't like to pass judgement
(C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's work.

I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.

1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
   Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers may
think that validation is for someone else to do.

2.  Include validation statistics on the stats tab.
  Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed, mappers
may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these statistics
give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological reward. I've been
validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be doing most of the
validations on a project -- and even though seeing the number by your name
increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I have to admit that I
miss it..
-- 
Dan
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validating

[john whelan]

> Hello, I read your message about validating, I am new,  I have digitized
a lot of buildings for Malawi, and the Vanatu. I thought I should just jump
in, work as completely as possible and then leave it to be validated. I
don't feel confident enough to say its done. Is that the wrong way to go
about, I don't want to generate a backlog for anyone. Thanks Keith

I'll reply in the general message area because it maybe of interest to
others.

First any mapping you do will be of use and will be used.

There are a couple of issues, first is OSM has many different opinions and
these are just mine.

HOT is more structured than OSM so we have a process where an area is
defined, a tile and only one mapper works there at a time.  Ideally the
tiles are the right size so one experienced mapper who knows what they are
doing can complete a tile and mark it done in a session.  Then someone
validates it.  Sometimes this is done in a maperthon where experienced
mappers are available to assist.  Sometimes its done by people working by
themselves.

Reality at the moment is we have a lot of inexperienced mappers and even
with the experienced ones they have different ideas about what should be
tagged and how they should be tagged.  Some work is being done about
getting guidelines drawn up with examples to assist.  Ideally with new
mappers you want to validate and give feedback fairly quickly.  It reduces
the number of errors in future and giving some sort of feedback is
generally motivating but we do have tiles that haven't been validated in
three years.

On Project 917 I aim to validate within one day and often within a few
hours.  I am not the project manager for 917 by the way.  If you look
you'll see quite a few tiles that haven't been validated.  I marked them
done so by convention someone else needs to validate them.

Generally speaking if you break a complex task down then you can divide it
up between less experienced people and leave the complex bits to others.
This is normal production line work flow.  We are dealing with volunteers
so the more boring jobs just don't get done and we have a lot of boring
jobs to do.

For urgent tasks we can swamp them with mappers.  For less urgent tasks it
becomes more complex how do we deliver as much as we can that is usable to
the client, in this case the NGOs, given the very limited resources we
have.  Mapping buildings is nice for the NGOs but given the choice between
one village complete with all the buildings and twenty or thirty mapped in
outlines complete with connecting roads which would you prefer and that's
part of the reason many newer projects do not ask for buildings.  The other
part is ones that do often don't get completed.  Projects 684-689 are ones
that ask for buildings.  Ebola related but its been some time since any
mapping was done.  If you don't mind doing a few buildings by the way 684
has plenty.

It takes time to go over a tile so if more than one mapper works there we
are burning up resources as each one scans the tile.  If we simplify the
tasks so that one less experienced mapper can go in and map the settlements
and connecting roads then mark it done this is good.  Validate it quickly
and move on.

When we add complications such as mines, schools, farmland, and ask mappers
to tag the road according to the width then the less experienced mappers
feel less confident about marking something done.  "If you can drive a 4X4
down it its a track", well yes but you'd be amazed where I can drive a 4X4
and some hazards for a 4X4 are not visible from a satellite image.  At that
point we are probably spending more people time going over the same tile
than we could be and the tasks are still not being marked done.  On 917 by
the way I typically add in anything missing when validating so that can be
a dozen settlements etc so just mark it done when you think its more or
less complete and I'll sort it out but you need to know the validators on
your project before you can tackle tiles this way.  Oh you'll probably get
a message saying the little round things in clusters are huts in
settlements by the way.

So my comments on validation are aimed not so much at the urgent tasks
where we can pull a rabbit out of a hat but more at how can we get more
maps for the clients out the existing mappers and how do we keep the
mappers we do have motivated?

Does that make sense?

Thanks John




On 27 March 2015 at 02:34, Esther Zurcher  wrote:

> Hello, I read your message about validating, I am new,  I have digitized a
> lot of buildings for Malawi, and the Vanatu. I thought I should just jump
> in, work as completely as possible and then leave it to be validated. I
> don't feel confident enough to say its done. Is that the wrong way to go
> about, I don't want to generate a backlog for anyone. Thanks Keith
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validating

[Blake Girardot]

Hi John,

I think what you write makes a lot of sense.

And as the person who wrote you says, this is also a very common feeling 
new mappers have, not being sure if they should mark a task done.


I think currently people who do create projects in the tasking manager 
try and keep what to map in mind as it relates to a few variables: 
difficulty of objects to map in general, mapper experience, imagery 
available, time and urgency among other things.


There is some room for experimentation as well. For example using the 
exact same area you could sequence the projects: 1st project just roads, 
next project just residential areas, next project building footprints, 
last project everything else. Or maybe building footprints could be last.


Which is very similar to your suggestion below about experience level of 
mappers and trying to tailor projects to meet that.


Or maybe that just increases the work load for mapping and validation 
having to go over the same area multiple times and some of it could be 
combined.


Thank you for the discussion, I know there are places we can improve and 
we just have to work some of them out.


On a related note: As James mentioned, I think "incomplete" is what I 
was coming to as well instead of invalid. Or as Charlotte suggested, we 
don't have to be bound to 1 word phrases :)


As soon as things quite down a little bit after a busy spring for HOT 
hopefully we can make some small adjustments around the edges and see if 
they help.


cheers,
blake





On 3/27/2015 1:09 PM, john whelan wrote:

 > Hello, I read your message about validating, I am new,  I have
digitized a lot of buildings for Malawi, and the Vanatu. I thought I
should just jump in, work as completely as possible and then leave it to
be validated. I don't feel confident enough to say its done. Is that the
wrong way to go about, I don't want to generate a backlog for anyone.
Thanks Keith

I'll reply in the general message area because it maybe of interest to
others.

First any mapping you do will be of use and will be used.

There are a couple of issues, first is OSM has many different opinions
and these are just mine.

HOT is more structured than OSM so we have a process where an area is
defined, a tile and only one mapper works there at a time.  Ideally the
tiles are the right size so one experienced mapper who knows what they
are doing can complete a tile and mark it done in a session.  Then
someone validates it.  Sometimes this is done in a maperthon where
experienced mappers are available to assist.  Sometimes its done by
people working by themselves.

Reality at the moment is we have a lot of inexperienced mappers and even
with the experienced ones they have different ideas about what should be
tagged and how they should be tagged.  Some work is being done about
getting guidelines drawn up with examples to assist.  Ideally with new
mappers you want to validate and give feedback fairly quickly.  It
reduces the number of errors in future and giving some sort of feedback
is generally motivating but we do have tiles that haven't been validated
in three years.

On Project 917 I aim to validate within one day and often within a few
hours.  I am not the project manager for 917 by the way.  If you look
you'll see quite a few tiles that haven't been validated.  I marked them
done so by convention someone else needs to validate them.

Generally speaking if you break a complex task down then you can divide
it up between less experienced people and leave the complex bits to
others.  This is normal production line work flow.  We are dealing with
volunteers so the more boring jobs just don't get done and we have a lot
of boring jobs to do.

For urgent tasks we can swamp them with mappers.  For less urgent tasks
it becomes more complex how do we deliver as much as we can that is
usable to the client, in this case the NGOs, given the very limited
resources we have.  Mapping buildings is nice for the NGOs but given the
choice between one village complete with all the buildings and twenty or
thirty mapped in outlines complete with connecting roads which would you
prefer and that's part of the reason many newer projects do not ask for
buildings.  The other part is ones that do often don't get completed.
Projects 684-689 are ones that ask for buildings.  Ebola related but its
been some time since any mapping was done.  If you don't mind doing a
few buildings by the way 684 has plenty.

It takes time to go over a tile so if more than one mapper works there
we are burning up resources as each one scans the tile.  If we simplify
the tasks so that one less experienced mapper can go in and map the
settlements and connecting roads then mark it done this is good.
Validate it quickly and move on.

When we add complications such as mines, schools, farmland, and ask
mappers to tag the road according to the width then the less experienced
mappers feel less confident about marking something done.  "If you can
drive a 4X4 down it 

[HOT] Validating by Username

[noah ahles]

Hi All,

I started a HOT club at the University of Vermont and we'd like to start
validating real time (or as close to real time as possible) at mapathons to
make sure people are editing to the best of their ability. We'd also like
to set up geomentoring relationships to pair club members with new mappers
so we can look over their work and message them with constructive feedback.
Is there a tool within ID Editor or JOSM for us to be able to look over
edits by username during the validation process?

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

Re: [HOT] validating tiles

[Denis Carriere]

Very good points you brought up Dan.

I feel very strongly about the #2 point about adding a statistic for
validators, it does take effort to browse the tiles properly. I sometimes
end up adding a few missing buildings or landuse areas if they are only a
few minor missing features.

Hopefully those points can be looked into & developed in the near future
for the Tasking Manager.
On Mar 24, 2015 9:53 PM, "Daniel Specht"  wrote:

> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could be
> because
> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
> (B) people don't like to pass judgement
> (C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's work.
>
> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.
>
> 1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
>Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers may
> think that validation is for someone else to do.
>
> 2.  Include validation statistics on the stats tab.
>   Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed, mappers
> may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these statistics
> give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological reward. I've been
> validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be doing most of the
> validations on a project -- and even though seeing the number by your name
> increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I have to admit that I
> miss it..
> --
> Dan
>
> ___
> 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] validating tiles

[Pierre GIRAUD]

Hi Daniel,

This makes much sense.
Do you have a github account? If so, please create an issue and copy
paste your message there.

Pierre

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 2:51 AM, Daniel Specht  wrote:
> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could be
> because
> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
> (B) people don't like to pass judgement
> (C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's work.
>
> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.
>
> 1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
>Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers may
> think that validation is for someone else to do.
>
> 2.  Include validation statistics on the stats tab.
>   Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed, mappers may
> think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these statistics give
> the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological reward. I've been
> validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be doing most of the
> validations on a project -- and even though seeing the number by your name
> increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I have to admit that I miss
> it..
> --
> Dan
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>



-- 
-
  | Pierre GIRAUD
-

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

Re: [HOT] validating tiles

[Pierre Béland]

We have already made similar propositions a few times on the Github isssues 
service for the Tasking manager.  See the recent 
discussion.https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/545
    
Pierre 

  De : Denis Carriere 
 À : Daniel Specht  
Cc : hot@openstreetmap.org 
 Envoyé le : Mercredi 25 mars 2015 0h55
 Objet : Re: [HOT] validating tiles
   
Very good points you brought up Dan.I feel very strongly about the #2 point 
about adding a statistic for validators, it does take effort to browse the 
tiles properly. I sometimes end up adding a few missing buildings or landuse 
areas if they are only a few minor missing features.Hopefully those points can 
be looked into & developed in the near future for the Tasking Manager.On Mar 
24, 2015 9:53 PM, "Daniel Specht"  wrote:



Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could be 
because (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement(B) people don't 
like to pass judgement(C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing 
someone else's work.
I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.
1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.     Because 
the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers may think that 
validation is for someone else to do.
2.  Include validation statistics on the stats tab.   Because the stats tab 
only has statistics for tiles completed, mappers may think that validating 
tiles is not essential. Also, these statistics give the mapper, but not the 
validator, a psychological reward. I've been validating a lot of tiles -- 
sometimes I seem to be doing most of the validations on a project -- and even 
though seeing the number by your name increment isn't the biggest thrill in the 
world, I have to admit that I miss it..-- 
Dan
___
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] validating tiles

[john whelan]

But on the other hand we have some mappers whom I'm confident their tiles
will contain only very minor errors, and given the large number of projects
that could do with mapping I'm not sure that spending time validating these
is the best use of our very limited resources.  If we are going to spend
time validating then perhaps we should seriously think of only taking on
new projects when we have the capacity to finish them within say a year.

I have noticed that validating the tile in JOSM with the validate button
has identified a number of issues.

I've also noticed that validating quickly on a project seems to help the
project roll along the feedback both helps correct mappers, they do less
errors in future and keeps them motivated.

The other issue is I've seen some validations when tiles are rejected for
minor reasons such as the classification of a highway as a track rather
than unclassified or a path was missed that led from nowhere to nowhere.
These sort of validations tend not to inspire.

Cheerio John

On 25 March 2015 at 05:55, Pierre Béland  wrote:

> We have already made similar propositions a few times on the Github
> isssues service for the Tasking manager.  See the recent discussion.
> https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/545
>
>
>
> Pierre
>
>   --
>  *De :* Denis Carriere 
> *À :* Daniel Specht 
> *Cc :* hot@openstreetmap.org
> *Envoyé le :* Mercredi 25 mars 2015 0h55
> *Objet :* Re: [HOT] validating tiles
>
> Very good points you brought up Dan.
> I feel very strongly about the #2 point about adding a statistic for
> validators, it does take effort to browse the tiles properly. I sometimes
> end up adding a few missing buildings or landuse areas if they are only a
> few minor missing features.
> Hopefully those points can be looked into & developed in the near future
> for the Tasking Manager.
> On Mar 24, 2015 9:53 PM, "Daniel Specht"  wrote:
>
>
>
> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could be
> because
> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
> (B) people don't like to pass judgement
> (C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's work.
>
> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.
>
> 1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
>Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers may
> think that validation is for someone else to do.
>
> 2.  Include validation statistics on the stats tab.
>   Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed, mappers
> may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these statistics
> give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological reward. I've been
> validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be doing most of the
> validations on a project -- and even though seeing the number by your name
> increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I have to admit that I
> miss it..
> --
> Dan
>
> ___
> 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] validating tiles

[john whelan]

and whilst I'm on my soap box there are two other issues with tiles.  The
first is micro tiling where tiles without much on them are split into
sixteen tiles each with perhaps one hut on them, and the other is I've seen
tiles that really are completely mapped, yes I've gone through them
systematically but I've had to add much less than I have when validating
sometimes.  I get the feeling some mappers don't feel confident enough to
mark a tile as done.

Cheerio John

On 25 March 2015 at 07:47, john whelan  wrote:

> But on the other hand we have some mappers whom I'm confident their tiles
> will contain only very minor errors, and given the large number of projects
> that could do with mapping I'm not sure that spending time validating these
> is the best use of our very limited resources.  If we are going to spend
> time validating then perhaps we should seriously think of only taking on
> new projects when we have the capacity to finish them within say a year.
>
> I have noticed that validating the tile in JOSM with the validate button
> has identified a number of issues.
>
> I've also noticed that validating quickly on a project seems to help the
> project roll along the feedback both helps correct mappers, they do less
> errors in future and keeps them motivated.
>
> The other issue is I've seen some validations when tiles are rejected for
> minor reasons such as the classification of a highway as a track rather
> than unclassified or a path was missed that led from nowhere to nowhere.
> These sort of validations tend not to inspire.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 25 March 2015 at 05:55, Pierre Béland  wrote:
>
>> We have already made similar propositions a few times on the Github
>> isssues service for the Tasking manager.  See the recent discussion.
>> https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/545
>>
>>
>>
>> Pierre
>>
>>   ----------
>>  *De :* Denis Carriere 
>> *À :* Daniel Specht 
>> *Cc :* hot@openstreetmap.org
>> *Envoyé le :* Mercredi 25 mars 2015 0h55
>> *Objet :* Re: [HOT] validating tiles
>>
>> Very good points you brought up Dan.
>> I feel very strongly about the #2 point about adding a statistic for
>> validators, it does take effort to browse the tiles properly. I sometimes
>> end up adding a few missing buildings or landuse areas if they are only a
>> few minor missing features.
>> Hopefully those points can be looked into & developed in the near future
>> for the Tasking Manager.
>> On Mar 24, 2015 9:53 PM, "Daniel Specht"  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could be
>> because
>> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
>> (B) people don't like to pass judgement
>> (C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's work.
>>
>> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.
>>
>> 1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
>>Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers
>> may think that validation is for someone else to do.
>>
>> 2.  Include validation statistics on the stats tab.
>>   Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed, mappers
>> may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these statistics
>> give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological reward. I've been
>> validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be doing most of the
>> validations on a project -- and even though seeing the number by your name
>> increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I have to admit that I
>> miss it..
>> --
>> Dan
>>
>> ___
>> 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] validating tiles

[Blake Girardot]

This is kind of a very subtle point, but I have written about it before:

I find it difficult to validate tiles because they so often need more 
work and are not really "done".


That leaves me with these choices:

1. Do the mapping myself, which I usually do, but then I have less time 
for validating tiles.


2. Mark the tile "invalid" and know that a new mapper is going to get an 
email saying their work has been "invalidated." I never do this unless 
it was clearly marked done as a mistake.


3. Unlock the tile and leave it as is for someone else to deal with. I 
do this more often than I care to admit.


I think we could do 1 or 2 things that would make the process a bit better:

1. We could change the term from "invalid", a somewhat strong term in 
English and what I consider "de-motivating". I can't think of one word, 
but we need something more friendly like "Needs more mapping"


2. Not send notices for "invalidated" tasks, and instead send 
notifications for "validated" tasks. I think mappers would be more 
motivated by getting positive feedback than negative feedback.


We could probably data mine the answer, but I wonder how many mappers 
who marked a tile "done" (often not even the person who did the mapping) 
and get an "invalidated" notice go then back and do the corrective mapping.


I think option 2 would be very easy to implement. I know I would do more 
validations and tiles that needed more mapping might get more mapping if 
I didn't have to worry about discouraging new mappers by "invalidating" 
tasks.


On a related note: I would encourage anyone who is doing training at 
missing maps or mapping parties to let mappers know, "invalidated" is 
totally fine and really just means "needs more mapping".


Cheers,
Blake







On 3/25/2015 2:51 AM, Daniel Specht wrote:

Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could
be because
(A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
(B) people don't like to pass judgement
(C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's work.

I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.

1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers
may think that validation is for someone else to do.

2.  Include validation statistics on the stats tab.
   Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed,
mappers may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these
statistics give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological
reward. I've been validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be
doing most of the validations on a project -- and even though seeing the
number by your name increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I
have to admit that I miss it..
--
Dan


___
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] validating tiles

[James Conkling]

'incomplete' instead of 'invalid'?

I'll be honest, I've never validated a task b/c I thought you needed a
certain level of 'certification' (even informally).

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Blake Girardot 
wrote:

>
>
> This is kind of a very subtle point, but I have written about it before:
>
> I find it difficult to validate tiles because they so often need more work
> and are not really "done".
>
> That leaves me with these choices:
>
> 1. Do the mapping myself, which I usually do, but then I have less time
> for validating tiles.
>
> 2. Mark the tile "invalid" and know that a new mapper is going to get an
> email saying their work has been "invalidated." I never do this unless it
> was clearly marked done as a mistake.
>
> 3. Unlock the tile and leave it as is for someone else to deal with. I do
> this more often than I care to admit.
>
> I think we could do 1 or 2 things that would make the process a bit better:
>
> 1. We could change the term from "invalid", a somewhat strong term in
> English and what I consider "de-motivating". I can't think of one word, but
> we need something more friendly like "Needs more mapping"
>
> 2. Not send notices for "invalidated" tasks, and instead send
> notifications for "validated" tasks. I think mappers would be more
> motivated by getting positive feedback than negative feedback.
>
> We could probably data mine the answer, but I wonder how many mappers who
> marked a tile "done" (often not even the person who did the mapping) and
> get an "invalidated" notice go then back and do the corrective mapping.
>
> I think option 2 would be very easy to implement. I know I would do more
> validations and tiles that needed more mapping might get more mapping if I
> didn't have to worry about discouraging new mappers by "invalidating" tasks.
>
> On a related note: I would encourage anyone who is doing training at
> missing maps or mapping parties to let mappers know, "invalidated" is
> totally fine and really just means "needs more mapping".
>
> Cheers,
> Blake
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 3/25/2015 2:51 AM, Daniel Specht wrote:
>
>> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could
>> be because
>> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
>> (B) people don't like to pass judgement
>> (C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's work.
>>
>> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.
>>
>> 1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
>> Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers
>> may think that validation is for someone else to do.
>>
>> 2.  Include validation statistics on the stats tab.
>>Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed,
>> mappers may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these
>> statistics give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological
>> reward. I've been validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be
>> doing most of the validations on a project -- and even though seeing the
>> number by your name increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I
>> have to admit that I miss it..
>> --
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] validating tiles

[john whelan]

"Needs another look?" maybe, both incomplete and invalid are slightly
negative.  I like the idea of sending someone a more positive message when
their tiles have been validated, could it include the comment by the
validator?

Cheerio John

On 25 March 2015 at 11:27, James Conkling 
wrote:

> 'incomplete' instead of 'invalid'?
>
> I'll be honest, I've never validated a task b/c I thought you needed a
> certain level of 'certification' (even informally).
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Blake Girardot 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> This is kind of a very subtle point, but I have written about it before:
>>
>> I find it difficult to validate tiles because they so often need more
>> work and are not really "done".
>>
>> That leaves me with these choices:
>>
>> 1. Do the mapping myself, which I usually do, but then I have less time
>> for validating tiles.
>>
>> 2. Mark the tile "invalid" and know that a new mapper is going to get an
>> email saying their work has been "invalidated." I never do this unless it
>> was clearly marked done as a mistake.
>>
>> 3. Unlock the tile and leave it as is for someone else to deal with. I do
>> this more often than I care to admit.
>>
>> I think we could do 1 or 2 things that would make the process a bit
>> better:
>>
>> 1. We could change the term from "invalid", a somewhat strong term in
>> English and what I consider "de-motivating". I can't think of one word, but
>> we need something more friendly like "Needs more mapping"
>>
>> 2. Not send notices for "invalidated" tasks, and instead send
>> notifications for "validated" tasks. I think mappers would be more
>> motivated by getting positive feedback than negative feedback.
>>
>> We could probably data mine the answer, but I wonder how many mappers who
>> marked a tile "done" (often not even the person who did the mapping) and
>> get an "invalidated" notice go then back and do the corrective mapping.
>>
>> I think option 2 would be very easy to implement. I know I would do more
>> validations and tiles that needed more mapping might get more mapping if I
>> didn't have to worry about discouraging new mappers by "invalidating" tasks.
>>
>> On a related note: I would encourage anyone who is doing training at
>> missing maps or mapping parties to let mappers know, "invalidated" is
>> totally fine and really just means "needs more mapping".
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Blake
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/25/2015 2:51 AM, Daniel Specht wrote:
>>
>>> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could
>>> be because
>>> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
>>> (B) people don't like to pass judgement
>>> (C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's work.
>>>
>>> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.
>>>
>>> 1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
>>> Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers
>>> may think that validation is for someone else to do.
>>>
>>> 2.  Include validation statistics on the stats tab.
>>>Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed,
>>> mappers may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these
>>> statistics give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological
>>> reward. I've been validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be
>>> doing most of the validations on a project -- and even though seeing the
>>> number by your name increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I
>>> have to admit that I miss it..
>>> --
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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] validating tiles

[Pete Masters]

It's an interesting discussion and one that we have fairly frequently.

At the mapathons we run in London, whoever is doing the training is careful
to make clear that volunteers should mark squares as done once they think
they are done. They are reassured that when a validator goes over their
mapping, they will either validate or they will help the mapper to develop
by providing pointers. They are encouraged, at that point, to go over their
work.

In the same vein, we have tables at mapathons where people who have been to
a few Missing Maps events start to validate the other attendees' work,
under the supervision of an experienced HOTty. These guys are encouraged
from the outset to leave positive and instructive feedback at the point of
invalidation.

We are trying to find ways to teach diligence whilst inspiring confidence
in the new mappers. Anecdotally, we think these measures are working, but
it would great to know. I love Blake's idea to data mine the effectiveness
of this!

Cheers,

Pete

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:36 PM, john whelan  wrote:

> "Needs another look?" maybe, both incomplete and invalid are slightly
> negative.  I like the idea of sending someone a more positive message when
> their tiles have been validated, could it include the comment by the
> validator?
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 25 March 2015 at 11:27, James Conkling 
> wrote:
>
>> 'incomplete' instead of 'invalid'?
>>
>> I'll be honest, I've never validated a task b/c I thought you needed a
>> certain level of 'certification' (even informally).
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Blake Girardot 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is kind of a very subtle point, but I have written about it before:
>>>
>>> I find it difficult to validate tiles because they so often need more
>>> work and are not really "done".
>>>
>>> That leaves me with these choices:
>>>
>>> 1. Do the mapping myself, which I usually do, but then I have less time
>>> for validating tiles.
>>>
>>> 2. Mark the tile "invalid" and know that a new mapper is going to get an
>>> email saying their work has been "invalidated." I never do this unless it
>>> was clearly marked done as a mistake.
>>>
>>> 3. Unlock the tile and leave it as is for someone else to deal with. I
>>> do this more often than I care to admit.
>>>
>>> I think we could do 1 or 2 things that would make the process a bit
>>> better:
>>>
>>> 1. We could change the term from "invalid", a somewhat strong term in
>>> English and what I consider "de-motivating". I can't think of one word, but
>>> we need something more friendly like "Needs more mapping"
>>>
>>> 2. Not send notices for "invalidated" tasks, and instead send
>>> notifications for "validated" tasks. I think mappers would be more
>>> motivated by getting positive feedback than negative feedback.
>>>
>>> We could probably data mine the answer, but I wonder how many mappers
>>> who marked a tile "done" (often not even the person who did the mapping)
>>> and get an "invalidated" notice go then back and do the corrective mapping.
>>>
>>> I think option 2 would be very easy to implement. I know I would do more
>>> validations and tiles that needed more mapping might get more mapping if I
>>> didn't have to worry about discouraging new mappers by "invalidating" tasks.
>>>
>>> On a related note: I would encourage anyone who is doing training at
>>> missing maps or mapping parties to let mappers know, "invalidated" is
>>> totally fine and really just means "needs more mapping".
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Blake
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/25/2015 2:51 AM, Daniel Specht wrote:
>>>
 Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could
 be because
 (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
 (B) people don't like to pass judgement
 (C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's work.

 I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.

 1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
 Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers
 may think that validation is for someone else to do.

 2.  Include validation statistics on the stats tab.
Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed,
 mappers may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these
 statistics give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological
 reward. I've been validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be
 doing most of the validations on a project -- and even though seeing the
 number by your name increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I
 have to admit that I miss it..
 --
 Dan


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


>>> ___
>>> HOT mailing list
>>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.op

Re: [HOT] validating tiles

[Cristiano Giovando]

I wonder if this has been discussed before - and I apologized if it
has - would it be a viable idea to add a slider or a percentage drop
down menu for the mapper to select the amount of work that still needs
to be done for each task? This can be a subjective and rough estimate
from the person working on the task, but who doesn't have time to
complete it. That way it would let people know which tasks can be
completed quickly - e.g. in 15 minutes mapping sessions - or if they
need more time. It will also add to the general stats for the project.
The percentage could visually correspond to shades of orange if we
want to represent that on the map.

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Pete Masters
 wrote:
> It's an interesting discussion and one that we have fairly frequently.
>
> At the mapathons we run in London, whoever is doing the training is careful
> to make clear that volunteers should mark squares as done once they think
> they are done. They are reassured that when a validator goes over their
> mapping, they will either validate or they will help the mapper to develop
> by providing pointers. They are encouraged, at that point, to go over their
> work.
>
> In the same vein, we have tables at mapathons where people who have been to
> a few Missing Maps events start to validate the other attendees' work, under
> the supervision of an experienced HOTty. These guys are encouraged from the
> outset to leave positive and instructive feedback at the point of
> invalidation.
>
> We are trying to find ways to teach diligence whilst inspiring confidence in
> the new mappers. Anecdotally, we think these measures are working, but it
> would great to know. I love Blake's idea to data mine the effectiveness of
> this!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pete
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:36 PM, john whelan  wrote:
>>
>> "Needs another look?" maybe, both incomplete and invalid are slightly
>> negative.  I like the idea of sending someone a more positive message when
>> their tiles have been validated, could it include the comment by the
>> validator?
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 25 March 2015 at 11:27, James Conkling 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 'incomplete' instead of 'invalid'?
>>>
>>> I'll be honest, I've never validated a task b/c I thought you needed a
>>> certain level of 'certification' (even informally).
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Blake Girardot 
>>> wrote:



 This is kind of a very subtle point, but I have written about it before:

 I find it difficult to validate tiles because they so often need more
 work and are not really "done".

 That leaves me with these choices:

 1. Do the mapping myself, which I usually do, but then I have less time
 for validating tiles.

 2. Mark the tile "invalid" and know that a new mapper is going to get an
 email saying their work has been "invalidated." I never do this unless it
 was clearly marked done as a mistake.

 3. Unlock the tile and leave it as is for someone else to deal with. I
 do this more often than I care to admit.

 I think we could do 1 or 2 things that would make the process a bit
 better:

 1. We could change the term from "invalid", a somewhat strong term in
 English and what I consider "de-motivating". I can't think of one word, but
 we need something more friendly like "Needs more mapping"

 2. Not send notices for "invalidated" tasks, and instead send
 notifications for "validated" tasks. I think mappers would be more 
 motivated
 by getting positive feedback than negative feedback.

 We could probably data mine the answer, but I wonder how many mappers
 who marked a tile "done" (often not even the person who did the mapping) 
 and
 get an "invalidated" notice go then back and do the corrective mapping.

 I think option 2 would be very easy to implement. I know I would do more
 validations and tiles that needed more mapping might get more mapping if I
 didn't have to worry about discouraging new mappers by "invalidating" 
 tasks.

 On a related note: I would encourage anyone who is doing training at
 missing maps or mapping parties to let mappers know, "invalidated" is
 totally fine and really just means "needs more mapping".

 Cheers,
 Blake








 On 3/25/2015 2:51 AM, Daniel Specht wrote:
>
> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could
> be because
> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
> (B) people don't like to pass judgement
> (C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's
> work.
>
> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.
>
> 1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
> Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers
> may think that validation is for someone e

Re: [HOT] validating tiles

[john whelan]

And just to go off at a tangent has anyone thought about tapping into old
people's homes?  Some residents are mentally alert and it might help keep
them amused.  Not a full scale mapathon and you might even have to explain
what a mouse is.  Many will not have wifi, but JOSM can work off line and I
understand even hold the images for a tile or two off line as well but if
you can pull it off you might find five or so residents per home putting an
hour a day into it and before anyone asks, my home contacts are 3,000 miles
away so I'm not best placed to do this, and I suspect you'd need to talk it
through with a home and someone who knows this sort of resident first on
how best to approach it.

Cheerio John

On 25 March 2015 at 14:12, Pete Masters  wrote:

> It's an interesting discussion and one that we have fairly frequently.
>
> At the mapathons we run in London, whoever is doing the training is
> careful to make clear that volunteers should mark squares as done once they
> think they are done. They are reassured that when a validator goes over
> their mapping, they will either validate or they will help the mapper to
> develop by providing pointers. They are encouraged, at that point, to go
> over their work.
>
> In the same vein, we have tables at mapathons where people who have been
> to a few Missing Maps events start to validate the other attendees' work,
> under the supervision of an experienced HOTty. These guys are encouraged
> from the outset to leave positive and instructive feedback at the point of
> invalidation.
>
> We are trying to find ways to teach diligence whilst inspiring confidence
> in the new mappers. Anecdotally, we think these measures are working, but
> it would great to know. I love Blake's idea to data mine the effectiveness
> of this!
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pete
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:36 PM, john whelan 
> wrote:
>
>> "Needs another look?" maybe, both incomplete and invalid are slightly
>> negative.  I like the idea of sending someone a more positive message when
>> their tiles have been validated, could it include the comment by the
>> validator?
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 25 March 2015 at 11:27, James Conkling 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 'incomplete' instead of 'invalid'?
>>>
>>> I'll be honest, I've never validated a task b/c I thought you needed a
>>> certain level of 'certification' (even informally).
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Blake Girardot 
>>> wrote:
>>>


 This is kind of a very subtle point, but I have written about it before:

 I find it difficult to validate tiles because they so often need more
 work and are not really "done".

 That leaves me with these choices:

 1. Do the mapping myself, which I usually do, but then I have less time
 for validating tiles.

 2. Mark the tile "invalid" and know that a new mapper is going to get
 an email saying their work has been "invalidated." I never do this unless
 it was clearly marked done as a mistake.

 3. Unlock the tile and leave it as is for someone else to deal with. I
 do this more often than I care to admit.

 I think we could do 1 or 2 things that would make the process a bit
 better:

 1. We could change the term from "invalid", a somewhat strong term in
 English and what I consider "de-motivating". I can't think of one word, but
 we need something more friendly like "Needs more mapping"

 2. Not send notices for "invalidated" tasks, and instead send
 notifications for "validated" tasks. I think mappers would be more
 motivated by getting positive feedback than negative feedback.

 We could probably data mine the answer, but I wonder how many mappers
 who marked a tile "done" (often not even the person who did the mapping)
 and get an "invalidated" notice go then back and do the corrective mapping.

 I think option 2 would be very easy to implement. I know I would do
 more validations and tiles that needed more mapping might get more mapping
 if I didn't have to worry about discouraging new mappers by "invalidating"
 tasks.

 On a related note: I would encourage anyone who is doing training at
 missing maps or mapping parties to let mappers know, "invalidated" is
 totally fine and really just means "needs more mapping".

 Cheers,
 Blake








 On 3/25/2015 2:51 AM, Daniel Specht wrote:

> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could
> be because
> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
> (B) people don't like to pass judgement
> (C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's
> work.
>
> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.
>
> 1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
> Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers
> ma

Re: [HOT] validating tiles

[Charlotte Wolter]

Hello,

Cheers to Blake and Dan for articulating all I have been feeling
about doing validations.
I do think that new terminology is needed ("invalidated" -- ugh!).
Why not just change it to "needs more mapping"? We don't need a single
word.
Also, it would be good to have a place to be a bit more specific
about what more needs to be done, such as "some buildings missing" or
"some ways missing."
As I think I said before, it also took me a little while to figure
out how to stop work on a particular section without clicking the
"Done" button. After I figured out that all I had to do was post a note
about how much I had been able to do, I no longer was clicking "Done"
incorrectly. We should make sure that it is clear how to stop working
on a section and let people know it's not done.
Last, Dan reminds us that someone (usually he) has to do the
validation work and that we all should pitch in, even if we are not
deeply experienced. If we see things that are not finished, but we
don't have the time to finish them ourselves, there should be an easy
way to indicate that someone else still needs to get in there and finish
the corrections. That way, the work gets spread around.
Martijn van Exel's Maproulette included several ways to indicate
the status of each correction, such as "could not fix it" or "needs more
work." That is a good model for validating in HOT.

Charlotte


At 08:09 AM 3/25/2015, you wrote:

This is kind of a very subtle point, but I have written about it before:
I find it difficult to validate tiles because they so often need more
work and are not really "done." That leaves me with these choices:
1. Do the mapping myself, which I usually do, but then I have less
time for validating tiles.
2. Mark the tile "invalid" and know that a new mapper is going to get
an email saying their work has been "invalidated." I never do this
unless it was clearly marked done as a mistake.
3. Unlock the tile and leave it as is for someone else to deal with.
I do this more often than I care to admit.
I think we could do 1 or 2 things that would make the process a bit
better:
1. We could change the term from "invalid," a somewhat strong term
in English and what I consider "demotivating." I can't think of one
word, but we need something more friendly like "Needs more mapping"
2. Not send notices for "invalidated" tasks, and instead send notifications
for "validated" tasks. I think mappers would be more motivated by
getting positive feedback than negative feedback. We could probably
data mine the answer, but I wonder how many mappers who marked a
tile "done" (often not even the person who did the mapping) and get an
"invalidated" notice go then back and do the corrective mapping.
I think option 2 would be very easy to implement. I know I would do more
validations and tiles that needed more mapping might get more mapping if
I didn't have to worry about discouraging new mappers by "invalidating"
tasks.
On a related note: I would encourage anyone who is doing training at
Missing Maps or mapping parties to let mappers know, "invalidated" is
totally fine and really just means "needs more mapping."

Cheers,
Blake

On 3/25/2015 2:51 AM, Daniel Specht wrote:
> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated  slowly. This could
> be because
> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
> (B) people don't like to pass judgement
> (C)  doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's work.
>
> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.
>
> 1.  Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
> Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers
> may think that validation is for someone else to do.
>
> 2.  Include validation statistics on the stats tab.
>Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed,
> mappers may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these
> statistics give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological
> reward. I've been validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be
> doing most of the validations on a project -- and even though seeing the
> number by your name increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I
> have to admit that I miss it..
> --
> Dan
> > >
___
> HOT mailing list > HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> ___
HOT mailing list HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot




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] Validating and imagery offset

[Kretzer]

Hi,
as there seemed to be a need for validating the last Haiti projects, I did some 
tiles, though I am not very comfortable with validating - considering myself 
halfway experienced at best.

I found several tiles that were very neatly mapped, all the buidlings squared, 
although they were all done by new mappers ... probably that was a mapathon or 
something with good instructions and supervisison.

But I don't really know what do do when I hit structures that are mapped to 
different imagery whith quite a lot of offset, like here: 
http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/2229#task/188
Should I clean this up while validating the "buildings only" project? How would 
I do this, align everything to Bing? (I remmeber having read that this is 
considered the most accurate). But then I would have to move around a lot of 
polygons, as all the new buildings are mapped to the custom imagery.
Or would you move the road to fit in with the majority of existing structures?

Thanks for your advice!
K

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

Re: [HOT] Validating by Username

[john whelan]

You need JOSM for validating anyway so if you're using JOSM then you can
simply search for everything and it will give you the mappers name.  iD
will not pick out the crossing ways and duplicate nodes etc.

Have you read through

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data#Why.2C_When_and_What_do_we_Validate.3F
?

When validating building projects use a search for building to highlight
them.  Makes it much easier to spot missing ones.

Other techniques are get your mappers to map at the top say left tile.
That way a validator can check their work even if they don't complete a
tile.

Have fun any questions bug me directly.

Cheerio John

On 1 February 2017 at 20:33, noah ahles  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I started a HOT club at the University of Vermont and we'd like to start
> validating real time (or as close to real time as possible) at mapathons to
> make sure people are editing to the best of their ability. We'd also like
> to set up geomentoring relationships to pair club members with new mappers
> so we can look over their work and message them with constructive feedback.
> Is there a tool within ID Editor or JOSM for us to be able to look over
> edits by username during the validation process?
>
> Thanks,
> Noah
>
> ___
> 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] Validating by Username

[Mike Thompson]

Another approach: If you have an element (node, way, relation) that you are
validating, once you select it in JOSM ("S" to put JOSM in "select mode"
and then click on the element), you can press +H to see everyone who
has ever edited it.


On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 6:49 PM, john whelan  wrote:

> You need JOSM for validating anyway so if you're using JOSM then you can
> simply search for everything and it will give you the mappers name.  iD
> will not pick out the crossing ways and duplicate nodes etc.
>
> Have you read through
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/
> Validating_data#Why.2C_When_and_What_do_we_Validate.3F ?
>
> When validating building projects use a search for building to highlight
> them.  Makes it much easier to spot missing ones.
>
> Other techniques are get your mappers to map at the top say left tile.
> That way a validator can check their work even if they don't complete a
> tile.
>
> Have fun any questions bug me directly.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 1 February 2017 at 20:33, noah ahles  wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I started a HOT club at the University of Vermont and we'd like to start
>> validating real time (or as close to real time as possible) at mapathons to
>> make sure people are editing to the best of their ability. We'd also like
>> to set up geomentoring relationships to pair club members with new mappers
>> so we can look over their work and message them with constructive feedback.
>> Is there a tool within ID Editor or JOSM for us to be able to look over
>> edits by username during the validation process?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Noah
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Validating by Username

[john whelan]

>Another approach: If you have an element (node, way, relation) that you
are validating, once you select it in JOSM ("S" to put JOSM in "select
mode" and then click on the element), you can press +H to see
everyone who has ever edited it.

Well yes but that means JOSM has to query the server which takes a bit of
extra time, just showing the last mapper is often good enough for
validating and the information is in the downloaded file.

Cheerio John

On 1 February 2017 at 21:24, Mike Thompson  wrote:

> Another approach: If you have an element (node, way, relation) that you
> are validating, once you select it in JOSM ("S" to put JOSM in "select
> mode" and then click on the element), you can press +H to see
> everyone who has ever edited it.
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 6:49 PM, john whelan  wrote:
>
>> You need JOSM for validating anyway so if you're using JOSM then you can
>> simply search for everything and it will give you the mappers name.  iD
>> will not pick out the crossing ways and duplicate nodes etc.
>>
>> Have you read through
>>
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Valid
>> ating_data#Why.2C_When_and_What_do_we_Validate.3F ?
>>
>> When validating building projects use a search for building to highlight
>> them.  Makes it much easier to spot missing ones.
>>
>> Other techniques are get your mappers to map at the top say left tile.
>> That way a validator can check their work even if they don't complete a
>> tile.
>>
>> Have fun any questions bug me directly.
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 1 February 2017 at 20:33, noah ahles  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I started a HOT club at the University of Vermont and we'd like to start
>>> validating real time (or as close to real time as possible) at mapathons to
>>> make sure people are editing to the best of their ability. We'd also like
>>> to set up geomentoring relationships to pair club members with new mappers
>>> so we can look over their work and message them with constructive feedback.
>>> Is there a tool within ID Editor or JOSM for us to be able to look over
>>> edits by username during the validation process?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Noah
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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] Validating by Username

[Jan Martinec]

Hello,

I see two ways for JOSM: one somewhat-clickable and without plugins, the 
other slightly more powerful.


Clickable:
- in the TM user profile,

http://tasks.hotosm.org/user/Piskvor

- there's an Overpass Turbo link to the user's edits, grouped by projects:

http://overpass-turbo.eu/map.html?Q=%3Cosm-script+output%3D%22json%22+timeout%3D%2225%22%3E%3Cunion%3E%3Cquery+type%3D%22node%22%3E%3Cuser+name%3D%22Piskvor%22%2F%3E%3Cbbox-query+w%3D%2229.087876%22+s%3D%22-3.902416%22+e%3D%2229.099227%22+n%3D%22-3.872915%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fquery%3E%3Cquery+type%3D%22way%22%3E%3Cuser+name%3D%22Piskvor%22%2F%3E%3Cbbox-query+w%3D%2229.087876%22+s%3D%22-3.902416%22+e%3D%2229.099227%22+n%3D%22-3.872915%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fquery%3E%3Cquery+type%3D%22relation%22%3E%3Cuser+name%3D%22Piskvor%22%2F%3E%3Cbbox-query+w%3D%2229.087876%22+s%3D%22-3.902416%22+e%3D%2229.099227%22+n%3D%22-3.872915%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fquery%3E%3C%2Funion%3E%3Cprint+mode%3D%22body%22%2F%3E%3Crecurse+type%3D%22down%22%2F%3E%3Cprint+mode%3D%22skeleton%22+order%3D%22quadtile%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fosm-script%3E

- If you open it without the map.html part:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/?Q=%3Cosm-script+output%3D%22json%22+timeout%3D%2225%22%3E%3Cunion%3E%3Cquery+type%3D%22node%22%3E%3Cuser+name%3D%22Piskvor%22%2F%3E%3Cbbox-query+w%3D%2229.087876%22+s%3D%22-3.902416%22+e%3D%2229.099227%22+n%3D%22-3.872915%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fquery%3E%3Cquery+type%3D%22way%22%3E%3Cuser+name%3D%22Piskvor%22%2F%3E%3Cbbox-query+w%3D%2229.087876%22+s%3D%22-3.902416%22+e%3D%2229.099227%22+n%3D%22-3.872915%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fquery%3E%3Cquery+type%3D%22relation%22%3E%3Cuser+name%3D%22Piskvor%22%2F%3E%3Cbbox-query+w%3D%2229.087876%22+s%3D%22-3.902416%22+e%3D%2229.099227%22+n%3D%22-3.872915%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fquery%3E%3C%2Funion%3E%3Cprint+mode%3D%22body%22%2F%3E%3Crecurse+type%3D%22down%22%2F%3E%3Cprint+mode%3D%22skeleton%22+order%3D%22quadtile%22%2F%3E%3C%2Fosm-script%3E

- there's an Export button at the top, with an option "Load into JOSM".
- This will complain about data format;
- click "repair data" and it will load via JOSM Remote Control.

This could be simplified a bit (and perhaps integrated into the TM 
website), but it works.


Mirrored_download JOSM plugin:
- install mirrored_download in JOSM Edit-Preferences-Plugins
- find the bounding box for the project (north,east,south,west)
- use the File-Download from Overpass option
- enter an Overpass query like this:


  
  


  
  


  
  




Note that you need to fill out the username three times, as well as the 
bounding box coordinates.

- and press Download

Best regards,
Jan Martinec

Dne 2. 2. 2017 2:36 napsal uživatel "noah ahles" >:


   Hi All,

   I started a HOT club at the University of Vermont and we'd like to
   start validating real time (or as close to real time as possible) at
   mapathons to make sure people are editing to the best of their
   ability. We'd also like to set up geomentoring relationships to pair
   club members with new mappers so we can look over their work and
   message them with constructive feedback. Is there a tool within ID
   Editor or JOSM for us to be able to look over edits by username
   during the validation process?

   Thanks,
   Noah

   ___
   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] Validating by Username

[Rory McCann]

Hi!

Yes, JOSM has the funtionality! First download the data for the area you
want. JOSM has a search function[1] by pressing Control-F. "user:" will
find all objects which were last edited by that username (e.g.
"user:rorym" will find all objects last touched by rorym).

The TODO list plugin[2] could be helpful here. Once the objects are
selected, you can add them to do the todo list, and work through them
one by one to verify each one is OK.

The JOSM validator[3] is good to run as well (Shift-V), it can find
common errors.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Search_function
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/TODO_list
[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Validator

Hope that helps

On 02/02/17 02:33, noah ahles wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> I started a HOT club at the University of Vermont and we'd like to start
> validating real time (or as close to real time as possible) at mapathons
> to make sure people are editing to the best of their ability. We'd also
> like to set up geomentoring relationships to pair club members with new
> mappers so we can look over their work and message them with
> constructive feedback. Is there a tool within ID Editor or JOSM for us
> to be able to look over edits by username during the validation process?
> 
> Thanks,
> Noah





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validating by Username

[noah ahles]

Awesome, thanks for all the feedback!

On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Marie Zemanova  wrote:

> Another way if this will be regular thing: make a stylesheet showing the
> name on the element at say zoom 20.
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validating by Username

[maning sambale]

You can also use http://osmcha.mapbox.com/ you can filter by username
or list of users or by bbox or many other combinations.

Basic tutorial here:
https://www.mapbox.com/mapping/validating-osm/#finding-suspicious-map-edits-using-osmcha

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 7:17 PM, noah ahles  wrote:
> Awesome, thanks for all the feedback!
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Marie Zemanova  wrote:
>>
>> Another way if this will be regular thing: make a stylesheet showing the
>> name on the element at say zoom 20.
>
>
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>



-- 
cheers,
maning
--
"Freedom is still the most radical idea of all" -N.Branden
https://epsg4253.wordpress.com/
http://twitter.com/maningsambale
--

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

Re: [HOT] Validating by Username

[Marie Zemanova]

Another way if this will be regular thing: make a stylesheet showing the
name on the element at say zoom 20.
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

[HOT] Validating - message being sent

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

Severin (sev_hotosm) commented in an earlier message that validation 
needs to include an overview of a whole area being mapped, and having 
attempted to validate a whole town, I agree with him. The checking of 
the small squares from the Tasking Manager  can only be an early stage, 
as you don't get a realistic view until you zoom out and look at the 
whole thing - in a little square something may look like a footpath 
partially obscured by trees, but when looking at the whole thing it 
becomes part of a tertiary road obscured by trees in just that square.


For the past few days I've been sending out messages through OSM to 
users (10 so far) who have contributed to the mapping in 
http://tasks.hotosm.org/job/141#. If possible I've looked at several 
completed squares before sending the message.


The message, with slight variations to suit the circumstances, reads;

/Hi & thank you for helping the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT). /



/I am an experienced mapper (still learning though!), and have looked 
through one (two..?..) of the squares you have completed for task from 
the OSM Tasking manager. You got it right, thanks!/




/If you are a regular contributor to HOT then keep up the good work. /



/If this is one of your first contributions, then thank you & please 
keep up the good work. There are many tasks outstanding in 
//http://tasks.hotosm.org///, all are for very good causes & it would be 
great if you could keep contributing./




/http://hot.openstreetmap.org///and 
//http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team//will tell 
you more about HOT. You can keep up to date about HOT, or particular 
areas by subscribing to the relevant lists at 
//https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo//. There is also 
//irc://irc.oftc.net #hot //for a link to others 
mapping for HOT, and the page 
//http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Irc//lists all of the IRC channels 
if you have an interest in a particular area./




/Keep up the good work & I hope to see more squares completed by you in 
the future./




/Regards/



/Tallguy"/

//
I'm intending to continue with this, aiming to;
a/. Encourage mappers to continue with HOT,
b/. help to provide a level of confidence & security that partner 
organisations would like to see, &

c/. help any mapper who obviously needs help.

We all make errors, and I'm not aiming to nit-pick. If I spot something 
I think should be added, I'm probably just adding it. I have 
'invalidated' a number of squares, but mainly because they were marked 
as complete a year or so ago, and more recent imagery showing more 
buildings & paths is now available, and this needs adding to OSM - if 
I've got time I'm doing it myself. One square was obviously a technical 
hitch - had been marked as complete, but nothing had been mapped in it.


Although it's very time consuming I'm hoping it will be seen as worthwhile.

I'd like others thoughts on the message I'm sending - I'm not picking 
out particular users, but sending it to everyone who's work I look at. 
Many people receiving the message will be better mappers than me and 
more experienced with HOT, but there are mappers who have not mapped for 
HOT recently, and I'm hoping this may make them think about contributing 
again. I'm not intending to send the same message to a user every time I 
validate one of their squares.


A few things to think about;
How any validation system should be managed, and by who? Anyone who uses 
the Tasking Manager is going to see this word 'validated', expect 
something to happen, and it may be an idea to put something on the 
wiki's about it. (I'm willing to have a go at the wiki myself, if that 
would help)
When a task is created, is the creator expecting to validate it 
themselves, or ?

Aid agencies - please comment as to whether this is what you would like.
Who decides who the validators are, and how?
Would you be willing to validate?

Thanks for reading.
--

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team


Mapping volunteer 'Tallguy' for http://www.openstreetmap.org 



Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for 
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk 
)


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

Re: [HOT] Validating and imagery offset

[john whelan]

This is my personal view after doing more than a fair amount of validation.

If you square the buildings you are making an approximation on what the
original mapper mapped.  It doesn't look as pretty to leave it as it was
but that is what I would do.  If mappers used the JOSM building tool to
start with there wouldn't be the problem.  Garbage in garbage out I think
is the technical computing term.  Politically you aren't supposed to delete
the mapper's work realistically it can be faster to delete and remap using
the JOSB building_tool plugin.  If you have the mappers for three hours I
can get more buildings mapped with the tool than they can do in iD and its
a lot more accurate, that includes the overhead for installing and
configuring JOSM.

If the buildings are way out compared to Bing then you could select one
displaced building and note the name.  Now search for all the buildings,
within that search for the mapper.  Hopefully all their buildings will be
displaced the same amount, move one building to alignment and the others
will fall into place.  Again realistically if a building is six feet or a
couple of meters out its findable so I don't even bother moving them these
days.

Why even bother validating you may ask, well its the 10,000+ unlabeled ways
in Africa, the 2,000+ highway=living_street in Nigeria the groups of
buildings that should be tagged landuse=residential but are tagged
building=house, the crossing highways, the highways that almost meet, the
highway=motorway between two villages 200 meters apart these are the ones I
try to catch.

Try to provide feedback, "added 97 buildings" if it nudges the mapper to do
it right next time you've saved some poor validator a lot of work
correcting but don't bother if it was mapped more than a month earlier.

I know I'm cynical.

Cheerio John

On 24 October 2016 at 08:03, Kretzer  wrote:

> Hi,
> as there seemed to be a need for validating the last Haiti projects, I did
> some tiles, though I am not very comfortable with validating - considering
> myself halfway experienced at best.
>
> I found several tiles that were very neatly mapped, all the buidlings
> squared, although they were all done by new mappers ... probably that was a
> mapathon or something with good instructions and supervisison.
>
> But I don't really know what do do when I hit structures that are mapped
> to different imagery whith quite a lot of offset, like here:
> http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/2229#task/188
> Should I clean this up while validating the "buildings only" project? How
> would I do this, align everything to Bing? (I remmeber having read that
> this is considered the most accurate). But then I would have to move around
> a lot of polygons, as all the new buildings are mapped to the custom
> imagery.
> Or would you move the road to fit in with the majority of existing
> structures?
>
> Thanks for your advice!
> K
>
> ___
> 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] Validating and imagery offset

[Mike Thompson]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 8:38 AM, john whelan  wrote:

>
> If the buildings are way out compared to Bing then you could select one
> displaced building and note the name.  Now search for all the buildings,
> within that search for the mapper.  Hopefully all their buildings will be
> displaced the same amount,
>
Typically the displacement between two imagery sources will vary with
location, thus selecting all of the buildings in a task done by a certain
mapper and moving them will not usually work unfortunately.

>
> On 24 October 2016 at 08:03, Kretzer  wrote:
>
>>
>> Should I clean this up while validating the "buildings only" project? How
>> would I do this, align everything to Bing? (I remmeber having read that
>> this is considered the most accurate). But then I would have to move around
>> a lot of polygons, as all the new buildings are mapped to the custom
>> imagery.
>> Or would you move the road to fit in with the majority of existing
>> structures?
>>
> This is an area where the instructions for the individual tasking manager
projects could be improved.
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validating and imagery offset

[Kretzer]

Well, as I said, in most of the tiles I checked, the mapping was surprisingly 
good. I only did a little cleanup in some tiles, and reminded one or two 
mappers of the squaring.
 
But in my example there were cleanly mapped buidlings aligned to the provided 
custom imagery, and a well mapped road aligned to the Bing image which was 
quite offset. So I was wondering if it's the right thing to do to move the road 
as all the other features are aligned to the custom image.
Also most of the other newly mapped structures in the task would be aligned to 
the custom imagery. So I guess it's better to keep those? 
But in the end everything should be in the "right" place, shouldn't it? 

 

Gesendet: Montag, 24. Oktober 2016 um 16:38 Uhr
Von: "john whelan" 
An: Kretzer 
Cc: "HOT Openstreetmap" 
Betreff: Re: [HOT] Validating and imagery offset

This is my personal view after doing more than a fair amount of validation.
 
If you square the buildings you are making an approximation on what the 
original mapper mapped.  It doesn't look as pretty to leave it as it was but 
that is what I would do.  If mappers used the JOSM building tool to start with 
there wouldn't be the problem.  Garbage in garbage out I think is the technical 
computing term.  Politically you aren't supposed to delete the mapper's work 
realistically it can be faster to delete and remap using the JOSB building_tool 
plugin.  If you have the mappers for three hours I can get more buildings 
mapped with the tool than they can do in iD and its a lot more accurate, that 
includes the overhead for installing and configuring JOSM.
 
If the buildings are way out compared to Bing then you could select one 
displaced building and note the name.  Now search for all the buildings, within 
that search for the mapper.  Hopefully all their buildings will be displaced 
the same amount, move one building to alignment and the others will fall into 
place.  Again realistically if a building is six feet or a couple of meters out 
its findable so I don't even bother moving them these days.
 
Why even bother validating you may ask, well its the 10,000+ unlabeled ways in 
Africa, the 2,000+ highway=living_street in Nigeria the groups of buildings 
that should be tagged landuse=residential but are tagged building=house, the 
crossing highways, the highways that almost meet, the highway=motorway between 
two villages 200 meters apart these are the ones I try to catch.
 
Try to provide feedback, "added 97 buildings" if it nudges the mapper to do it 
right next time you've saved some poor validator a lot of work correcting but 
don't bother if it was mapped more than a month earlier.
 
I know I'm cynical.
 
Cheerio John
 
On 24 October 2016 at 08:03, Kretzer mailto:kret...@gmx.net]> 
wrote:Hi,
as there seemed to be a need for validating the last Haiti projects, I did some 
tiles, though I am not very comfortable with validating - considering myself 
halfway experienced at best.

I found several tiles that were very neatly mapped, all the buidlings squared, 
although they were all done by new mappers ... probably that was a mapathon or 
something with good instructions and supervisison.

But I don't really know what do do when I hit structures that are mapped to 
different imagery whith quite a lot of offset, like here: 
http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/2229#task/188[http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/2229#task/188]
Should I clean this up while validating the "buildings only" project? How would 
I do this, align everything to Bing? (I remmeber having read that this is 
considered the most accurate). But then I would have to move around a lot of 
polygons, as all the new buildings are mapped to the custom imagery.
Or would you move the road to fit in with the majority of existing structures?

Thanks for your advice!
K

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

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

Re: [HOT] Validating - message being sent

[Severin Menard]

Hi Nick,


On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Nick Allen wrote:

>  Hi,
>
> Severin (sev_hotosm) commented in an earlier message that validation needs
> to include an overview of a whole area being mapped, and having attempted
> to validate a whole town, I agree with him. The checking of the small
> squares from the Tasking Manager  can only be an early stage, as you don't
> get a realistic view until you zoom out and look at the whole thing - in a
> little square something may look like a footpath partially obscured by
> trees, but when looking at the whole thing it becomes part of a tertiary
> road obscured by trees in just that square.
>
Great you did this Validation. As announced in the last thread we had on
the Validation topic: I started a wikipage about Validation. May be good to
work collectively on it then move it to LearnOSM?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data

>
> For the past few days I've been sending out messages through OSM to users
> (10 so far) who have contributed to the mapping in
> http://tasks.hotosm.org/job/141#. If possible I've looked at several
> completed squares before sending the message.
>
> The message, with slight variations to suit the circumstances, reads;
>
> *Hi & thank you for helping the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT). *
>
> *I am an experienced mapper (still learning though!), and have looked
> through one (two..?..) of the squares you have completed for task from the
> OSM Tasking manager. You got it right, thanks!*
>
> *If you are a regular contributor to HOT then keep up the good work. *
>
> *If this is one of your first contributions, then thank you & please keep
> up the good work. There are many tasks outstanding in 
> **http://tasks.hotosm.org/
> ** , all are for very good causes & it would be
> great if you could keep contributing.*
>
> *http://hot.openstreetmap.org/ ** and 
> **http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team
> ** will tell
> you more about HOT. You can keep up to date about HOT, or particular areas
> by subscribing to the relevant lists at 
> **https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo
> ** . There is also 
> **irc://irc.oftc.net
> #hot** for a link to others mapping for HOT, and the page 
> **http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Irc
> ** lists all of the IRC channels
> if you have an interest in a particular area.*
>
> *Keep up the good work & I hope to see more squares completed by you in
> the future.*
>
> *Regards*
>
> *Tallguy"*
>
> I'm intending to continue with this, aiming to;
> a/. Encourage mappers to continue with HOT,
>
Good idea

>  b/. help to provide a level of confidence & security that partner
> organisations would like to see, &
> c/. help any mapper who obviously needs help.
>
I use to send ad hoc messages to mostly beginner mappers, when their
mapping could be improved (most of time it is about squaring buildings,
creating easily perfect circles or not mapping blocks but buildings

>
> We all make errors, and I'm not aiming to nit-pick. If I spot something I
> think should be added, I'm probably just adding it. I have 'invalidated' a
> number of squares, but mainly because they were marked as complete a year
> or so ago, and more recent imagery showing more buildings & paths is now
> available, and this needs adding to OSM - if I've got time I'm doing it
> myself. One square was obviously a technical hitch - had been marked as
> complete, but nothing had been mapped in it.
>
I also find from time to time some squares that are neither empty nor close
to be and invalidate them

>
> Although it's very time consuming I'm hoping it will be seen as worthwhile.
>
> I'd like others thoughts on the message I'm sending - I'm not picking out
> particular users, but sending it to everyone who's work I look at. Many
> people receiving the message will be better mappers than me and more
> experienced with HOT, but there are mappers who have not mapped for HOT
> recently, and I'm hoping this may make them think about contributing again.
> I'm not intending to send the same message to a user every time I validate
> one of their squares.
>
> A few things to think about;
> How any validation system should be managed, and by who? Anyone who uses
> the Tasking Manager is going to see this word 'validated', expect something
> to happen, and it may be an idea to put something on the wiki's about it.
> (I'm willing to have a go at the wiki myself, if that would help)
>
I think receiving messages (validation or invalidation) from the task you
mark as done has been ticketed for future implementation or discussed

>  When a task is created, is the creator expecting to validate it
> themselves, or ?
>
I hope not, considering the number of jobs I recently created :)

>  Aid agencies - please comment as to whet

[HOT] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

I was recently involved in teaching a large group of new mappers, and 
close to the end of the session I repeated to them how to find the 
squares they have mapped, click on them, and see the comments that the 
validator had left. At the end of the session I was approached by 
representatives of both the British Red Cross & Medecins Sans Frontier 
who each commented that it seemed like a long process, and couldn't it 
be automated so that a message is automatically sent to the mapper 
concerned. At the time, I replied that the many hundreds of very good 
mappers would not want a pestering email every time one of their 
hundreds of squares was validated.


However, on further reflection I am having second thoughts, but don't 
know if;


a/. there is something already in the pipeline, &
b/. what other HOTties have in the way of ideas about this.

I should explain that I see validation as both a quality control 
feature, and a training aid. Rather than invalidate, I will frequently 
validate a square if it only involves work I can complete in a few 
minutes, and I will leave a message in the square something like 'Click 
on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after: 
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0 I've 
joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present - 
screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut. 
etc..'   In this case it would obviously be good if there was an 
option within the Tasking manager that allowed me to send this as a 
message to the mapper concerned rather than leave it to chance as to 
whether it is ever seen. If this feature was implemented I would suggest 
that it was a tick box that the validator would have to select with the 
text similar to 'Tick this box if you require your comments to be sent 
as part of a message to the mapper concerned'.


The ticking of the box & then confirming with the validate button would 
cause a message (email or OSM messaging system) with a preformed text 
such as

_

Title=HOT Validators feedback, square @@@

Hi & thanks for mapping for the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team,

A validator has recently validated square @@ which you 
marked as complete on @@date@@ & has asked that the following comments 
are passed on to you;


/Click on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after: 
//https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0//I've 
joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present - 
screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut. etc../


Please take these comments in the positive way they were intended. The 
Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team would like to see you map many more 
squares & the comments are only intended to keep the mapping standards high.


Keep up the good work, and thanks again for mapping for HOT.

This is an automated message.
_

There was a genuine interest from members of BRC & MSF when asking me 
about this, and there was an offer to help with the coding as well. 
Personally something like this would save me a lot of time - I'm 
currently trying to validate the work of about 60 new mappers and 
anything which speeds up the process would really help.


I'd welcome some discussion on this.

--

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team


http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for 
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk 
)


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

[HOT] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[latte]

I  actually think we're overthinking this issue.  The first few suggestions 
that were made were on the money - that mappers can have the ability to receive 
feedback on squares they complete, by ticking an opt-in box when they complete 
a task.  Validators can then provide valuable feedback to new and longstanding 
mappers alike.

I have dabbled in IRC in the past, but now that I tend to use a graphic based 
environment, I find IRC very draining and sometimes hard to follow. The task 
manager provides such a clean welcoming interface, that it seems a backward 
step to have to refer to IRC to ask questions.  I have found ways of checking 
back on tasks I complete through stats, and I have found how to message the 
author of an object by sourcing their nickname through JOSM, authors. This has 
allowed me to provide some feedback, but I'm not sure how the 'experienced' 
community deals with mappers who regularly make the same errors or poorly 
interpret aerial images.

IMO I would like the opportunity to give and receive feedback on tasks that I 
complete/validate. Perhaps add a 'Mark as Done - request feedback' button, or a 
check box for each task.  Validators could then have 'invalidate - provide 
feedback' and 'validate - provide feedback' buttons, or check boxes that would 
include comments they have made on the task.

I am really wanting to get feedback on the work that I'm completing, but don't 
know the best way to request this so I hope we can reach a solution soon.

Regards

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

[HOT] Validating - Take a Task at Random

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

For info of all who are consciously validating squares (& a few who may 
not realise they have been validating).


I've been contacted concerning one of the very successful recent 
mapathons. A little research after the event has shown that several 
squares of at least one project have been marked as validated by mappers 
extremely new to the system - unfortunately the squares are not up to 
standard and more work is taking place to correct this.


We think that the likely scenario is - When all squares of a project are 
either complete or locked by another mapper, Tasking Manager will 
allocate you a square to validate - if you are extremely new to the 
system you probably will not realise what has happened and will look 
round the square & then add a brief comment before marking the square as 
done. Having spoken at several mapathons, and listened to other mappers 
giving guidance I know that;

a/. you can't say everything before letting someone start, &
b/. even if you did they probably wouldn't remember it all anyway.

I've added to the entry on the tasking manager in learnOSM - link is 
http://learnosm.org/en/coordination/tasking-manager/#contribute-tab & I 
ask that validators just bear this in mind - have a quick look at the 
usernames of others who have validated within the project you are 
working on, and be prepared to reopen squares that may have already been 
validated if there are problems. I'm not talking about 'they missed one 
building in the middle of 200', I'm talking about buildings should have 
been traced, there were hundreds, but none were traced!


I can see how easy a mistake it is to make, and I think it's something 
we should be aware of and try to negate in the future. Meanwhile I 
suggest that if you find one, send a message to the mapper concerned 
including the above link.


To my knowledge there has never been a decision about what 
qualifications are required before someone validates, and I'm not sure 
there is an answer to that - a few of my thoughts;
1. I've checked up on one validator who had (at the time I checked) 
never completed a square - extremely good mapper with lots of experience 
in other areas of mapping, and gives good feedback - if it's you, keep 
up the good work, thanks.
2. I found someone mapping on the day their OSM username was issued. 
Their mapping was obviously well beyond the standard we expect of a new 
mapper. On sending a message I established they wanted a new username to 
use whilst mapping for HOT - I asked them to start validating. Again, 
keep up the good work, thanks.

3. I'm still learning.

Perhaps this is something for discussion at one of the working groups.
--

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team


http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for 
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk 
)


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

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[Blake Girardot]

I wholeheartedly agree that an automated message that sends the comments 
when a task is validated or invalidated would be great.


I really like feedback on the mapping I do.

Sort of related, I'd like to be able to subscribe to comments on a task 
so I get an email every time someone comments on a task I have 
subscribed to (probably because I have worked on it).


I am a new mapper so I have not seen a lot of tasks and do not know how 
often comments on tasks are used, but the tasks I work on, I try to 
comment as often and helpfully as I can.


Thank you for bringing up this idea.

Regards,
Blake Girardot

On 8/29/2014 12:47 PM, Nick Allen wrote:

Hi,

I was recently involved in teaching a large group of new mappers, and
close to the end of the session I repeated to them how to find the
squares they have mapped, click on them, and see the comments that the
validator had left. At the end of the session I was approached by
representatives of both the British Red Cross & Medecins Sans Frontier
who each commented that it seemed like a long process, and couldn't it
be automated so that a message is automatically sent to the mapper
concerned. At the time, I replied that the many hundreds of very good
mappers would not want a pestering email every time one of their
hundreds of squares was validated.

However, on further reflection I am having second thoughts, but don't
know if;

a/. there is something already in the pipeline, &
b/. what other HOTties have in the way of ideas about this.

I should explain that I see validation as both a quality control
feature, and a training aid. Rather than invalidate, I will frequently
validate a square if it only involves work I can complete in a few
minutes, and I will leave a message in the square something like 'Click
on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0
I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present
- screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut.
etc..'   In this case it would obviously be good if there was an
option within the Tasking manager that allowed me to send this as a
message to the mapper concerned rather than leave it to chance as to
whether it is ever seen. If this feature was implemented I would suggest
that it was a tick box that the validator would have to select with the
text similar to 'Tick this box if you require your comments to be sent
as part of a message to the mapper concerned'.

The ticking of the box & then confirming with the validate button would
cause a message (email or OSM messaging system) with a preformed text
such as
_

Title=HOT Validators feedback, square @@@

Hi & thanks for mapping for the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team,

A validator has recently validated square @@ which you
marked as complete on @@date@@ & has asked that the following comments
are passed on to you;

/Click on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after:
//https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0//
I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present
- screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut. etc../

Please take these comments in the positive way they were intended. The
Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team would like to see you map many more
squares & the comments are only intended to keep the mapping standards high.

Keep up the good work, and thanks again for mapping for HOT.

This is an automated message.
_

There was a genuine interest from members of BRC & MSF when asking me
about this, and there was an offer to help with the coding as well.
Personally something like this would save me a lot of time - I'm
currently trying to validate the work of about 60 new mappers and
anything which speeds up the process would really help.

I'd welcome some discussion on this.

--

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk
)



___
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] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[Pierre Béland]

Sending a message for every task validated risk to irritate people.  Instead, 
let's bring a social plus learning function in this CrowdSourcing Task Manager.


The best is to create a place of discussion (IRC like) directly related to the 
task Manager. The Validation comments could also be listed in this IRC. On the 
of the page, their could be a count of how many contributors currently selected 
a task.

The mappers, validators and coordinators would then have a place of discussion. 
This would play some social gathering function easily accessible plus help 
support for beginners.

 
Pierre 




 De : Blake Girardot 
À : "HOT@openstreetmap.org"  
Envoyé le : Vendredi 29 août 2014 13h03
Objet : Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?
 

I wholeheartedly agree that an automated message that sends the comments 
when a task is validated or invalidated would be great.

I really like feedback on the mapping I do.

Sort of related, I'd like to be able to subscribe to comments on a task 
so I get an email every time someone comments on a task I have 
subscribed to (probably because I have worked on it).

I am a new mapper so I have not seen a lot of tasks and do not know how 
often comments on tasks are used, but the tasks I work on, I try to 
comment as often and helpfully as I can.

Thank you for bringing up this idea.

Regards,
Blake Girardot

On 8/29/2014 12:47 PM, Nick Allen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was recently involved in teaching a large group of new mappers, and
> close to the end of the session I repeated to them how to find the
> squares they have mapped, click on them, and see the comments that the
> validator had left. At the end of the session I was approached by
> representatives of both the British Red Cross & Medecins Sans Frontier
> who each commented that it seemed like a long process, and couldn't it
> be automated so that a message is automatically sent to the mapper
> concerned. At the time, I replied that the many hundreds of very good
> mappers would not want a pestering email every time one of their
> hundreds of squares was validated.
>
> However, on further reflection I am having second thoughts, but don't
> know if;
>
> a/. there is something already in the pipeline, &
> b/. what other HOTties have in the way of ideas about this.
>
> I should explain that I see validation as both a quality control
> feature, and a training aid. Rather than invalidate, I will frequently
> validate a square if it only involves work I can complete in a few
> minutes, and I will leave a message in the square something like 'Click
> on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after:
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0
> I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present
> - screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut.
> etc..'   In this case it would obviously be good if there was an
> option within the Tasking manager that allowed me to send this as a
> message to the mapper concerned rather than leave it to chance as to
> whether it is ever seen. If this feature was implemented I would suggest
> that it was a tick box that the validator would have to select with the
> text similar to 'Tick this box if you require your comments to be sent
> as part of a message to the mapper concerned'.
>
> The ticking of the box & then confirming with the validate button would
> cause a message (email or OSM messaging system) with a preformed text
> such as
> _
>
> Title=HOT Validators feedback, square @@@
>
> Hi & thanks for mapping for the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team,
>
> A validator has recently validated square @@ which you
> marked as complete on @@date@@ & has asked that the following comments
> are passed on to you;
>
> /Click on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after:
> //https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0//
> I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present
> - screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut. etc../
>
> Please take these comments in the positive way they were intended. The
> Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team would like to see you map many more
> squares & the comments are only intended to keep the mapping standards high.
>
> Keep up the good work, and thanks again for mapping for HOT.
>
> This is an automated message.
> _
>
> There was a genuine interest from members of BRC & MSF when asking me
> about this, and there was an off

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[Nick Allen]

Pierre,

I would not want to see a message sent to every mapper for every square, 
only for those where I take an additional step of selecting the function 
to send a message.


Nick

. On 29/08/14 18:41, Pierre Béland wrote:
Sending a message for every task validated risk to irritate people.  
Instead, let's bring a social plus learning function in this 
CrowdSourcing Task Manager.


The best is to create a place of discussion (IRC like) directly 
related to the task Manager. The Validation comments could also be 
listed in this IRC. On the of the page, their could be a count of how 
many contributors currently selected a task.


The mappers, validators and coordinators would then have a place of 
discussion. This would play some social gathering function easily 
accessible plus help support for beginners.


Pierre


*De :* Blake Girardot 
*À :* "HOT@openstreetmap.org" 
*Envoyé le :* Vendredi 29 août 2014 13h03
*Objet :* Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

I wholeheartedly agree that an automated message that sends the comments
when a task is validated or invalidated would be great.

I really like feedback on the mapping I do.

Sort of related, I'd like to be able to subscribe to comments on a task
so I get an email every time someone comments on a task I have
subscribed to (probably because I have worked on it).

I am a new mapper so I have not seen a lot of tasks and do not know how
often comments on tasks are used, but the tasks I work on, I try to
comment as often and helpfully as I can.

Thank you for bringing up this idea.

Regards,
Blake Girardot

On 8/29/2014 12:47 PM, Nick Allen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was recently involved in teaching a large group of new mappers, and
> close to the end of the session I repeated to them how to find the
> squares they have mapped, click on them, and see the comments that the
> validator had left. At the end of the session I was approached by
> representatives of both the British Red Cross & Medecins Sans Frontier
> who each commented that it seemed like a long process, and couldn't it
> be automated so that a message is automatically sent to the mapper
> concerned. At the time, I replied that the many hundreds of very good
> mappers would not want a pestering email every time one of their
> hundreds of squares was validated.
>
> However, on further reflection I am having second thoughts, but don't
> know if;
>
> a/. there is something already in the pipeline, &
> b/. what other HOTties have in the way of ideas about this.
>
> I should explain that I see validation as both a quality control
> feature, and a training aid. Rather than invalidate, I will frequently
> validate a square if it only involves work I can complete in a few
> minutes, and I will leave a message in the square something like 'Click
> on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after:
> 
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0

> I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present
> - screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut.
> etc..'  In this case it would obviously be good if there was an
> option within the Tasking manager that allowed me to send this as a
> message to the mapper concerned rather than leave it to chance as to
> whether it is ever seen. If this feature was implemented I would suggest
> that it was a tick box that the validator would have to select with the
> text similar to 'Tick this box if you require your comments to be sent
> as part of a message to the mapper concerned'.
>
> The ticking of the box & then confirming with the validate button would
> cause a message (email or OSM messaging system) with a preformed text
> such as
> _
>
> Title=HOT Validators feedback, square @@@
>
> Hi & thanks for mapping for the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team,
>
> A validator has recently validated square @@ which you
> marked as complete on @@date@@ & has asked that the following comments
> are passed on to you;
>
> /Click on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after:
> 
//https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0//

> I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present
> - screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut. 
etc../

>
> Please take these comments in the positive way they were intended. The
> Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team would like to see you map many more
> squares & the comments are only intended to keep the mapping 
standards high.

>
> Keep up the

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[Clifford Snow]

I think getting a message about editing errors is a valid quality process.
I suppose that you could allow the editor to opt out, or even opt in to
messages as well as confirmation that the edit was validated.

Clifford
On Aug 29, 2014 9:47 AM, "Nick Allen"  wrote:

>  Hi,
>
> I was recently involved in teaching a large group of new mappers, and
> close to the end of the session I repeated to them how to find the squares
> they have mapped, click on them, and see the comments that the validator
> had left. At the end of the session I was approached by representatives of
> both the British Red Cross & Medecins Sans Frontier who each commented that
> it seemed like a long process, and couldn't it be automated so that a
> message is automatically sent to the mapper concerned. At the time, I
> replied that the many hundreds of very good mappers would not want a
> pestering email every time one of their hundreds of squares was validated.
>
> However, on further reflection I am having second thoughts, but don't know
> if;
>
> a/. there is something already in the pipeline, &
> b/. what other HOTties have in the way of ideas about this.
>
> I should explain that I see validation as both a quality control feature,
> and a training aid. Rather than invalidate, I will frequently validate a
> square if it only involves work I can complete in a few minutes, and I will
> leave a message in the square something like 'Click on this link to see
> screenshots showing the before & after:
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0
> I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present -
> screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut. etc..'
> In this case it would obviously be good if there was an option within the
> Tasking manager that allowed me to send this as a message to the mapper
> concerned rather than leave it to chance as to whether it is ever seen. If
> this feature was implemented I would suggest that it was a tick box that
> the validator would have to select with the text similar to 'Tick this box
> if you require your comments to be sent as part of a message to the mapper
> concerned'.
>
> The ticking of the box & then confirming with the validate button would
> cause a message (email or OSM messaging system) with a preformed text such
> as
> _
>
> Title=HOT Validators feedback, square @@@
>
> Hi & thanks for mapping for the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team,
>
> A validator has recently validated square @@ which you
> marked as complete on @@date@@ & has asked that the following comments
> are passed on to you;
>
> *Click on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after: 
> **https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0
> **
> I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present -
> screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut. etc..*
>
> Please take these comments in the positive way they were intended. The
> Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team would like to see you map many more squares
> & the comments are only intended to keep the mapping standards high.
>
> Keep up the good work, and thanks again for mapping for HOT.
>
> This is an automated message.
> _
>
> There was a genuine interest from members of BRC & MSF when asking me
> about this, and there was an offer to help with the coding as well.
> Personally something like this would save me a lot of time - I'm currently
> trying to validate the work of about 60 new mappers and anything which
> speeds up the process would really help.
>
> I'd welcome some discussion on this.
>
> --
>
> Nick
>
> Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy
>
> Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for
> http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk)
>
> ___
> 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] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[Sander Deryckere]

I don't really like getting notified for every validated square. But I
would like some interface where I can query certain stuff.

* Query the tiles I worked on
* Query the tiles I commented on
* Query the tiles I set to "Done"
* Query the tiles I (in)validated

And then also some filters I could apply, like I could only see the
validated tiles I marked as "Done" to see those comments. I could see how
many of my tiles were (in)validated, to see how good I'm doing, ...




2014-08-29 19:58 GMT+02:00 Clifford Snow :

> I think getting a message about editing errors is a valid quality process.
> I suppose that you could allow the editor to opt out, or even opt in to
> messages as well as confirmation that the edit was validated.
>
> Clifford
> On Aug 29, 2014 9:47 AM, "Nick Allen"  wrote:
>
>>  Hi,
>>
>> I was recently involved in teaching a large group of new mappers, and
>> close to the end of the session I repeated to them how to find the squares
>> they have mapped, click on them, and see the comments that the validator
>> had left. At the end of the session I was approached by representatives of
>> both the British Red Cross & Medecins Sans Frontier who each commented that
>> it seemed like a long process, and couldn't it be automated so that a
>> message is automatically sent to the mapper concerned. At the time, I
>> replied that the many hundreds of very good mappers would not want a
>> pestering email every time one of their hundreds of squares was validated.
>>
>> However, on further reflection I am having second thoughts, but don't
>> know if;
>>
>> a/. there is something already in the pipeline, &
>> b/. what other HOTties have in the way of ideas about this.
>>
>> I should explain that I see validation as both a quality control feature,
>> and a training aid. Rather than invalidate, I will frequently validate a
>> square if it only involves work I can complete in a few minutes, and I will
>> leave a message in the square something like 'Click on this link to see
>> screenshots showing the before & after:
>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0
>> I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present -
>> screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut. etc..'
>> In this case it would obviously be good if there was an option within the
>> Tasking manager that allowed me to send this as a message to the mapper
>> concerned rather than leave it to chance as to whether it is ever seen. If
>> this feature was implemented I would suggest that it was a tick box that
>> the validator would have to select with the text similar to 'Tick this box
>> if you require your comments to be sent as part of a message to the mapper
>> concerned'.
>>
>> The ticking of the box & then confirming with the validate button would
>> cause a message (email or OSM messaging system) with a preformed text such
>> as
>> _
>>
>> Title=HOT Validators feedback, square @@@
>>
>> Hi & thanks for mapping for the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team,
>>
>> A validator has recently validated square @@ which you
>> marked as complete on @@date@@ & has asked that the following comments
>> are passed on to you;
>>
>> *Click on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after: 
>> **https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0
>> **
>> I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present -
>> screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut. etc..*
>>
>> Please take these comments in the positive way they were intended. The
>> Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team would like to see you map many more squares
>> & the comments are only intended to keep the mapping standards high.
>>
>> Keep up the good work, and thanks again for mapping for HOT.
>>
>> This is an automated message.
>> _
>>
>> There was a genuine interest from members of BRC & MSF when asking me
>> about this, and there was an offer to help with the coding as well.
>> Personally something like this would save me a lot of time - I'm currently
>> trying to validate the work of about 60 new mappers and anything which
>> speeds up the process would really help.
>>
>> I'd welcome some discussion on this.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy
>>
>> Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for
>> http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk)
>>
>> ___
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.o

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[Blake Girardot]

I just want to make sure I understand this:

We are just talking about getting an email for squares that we 
personally have marked as "completed" when it gets validated or 
invalidated, not for every square that gets validated.


Or, as an alternative:

Every square that we have personally marked as completed AND that we 
have checked a box for that says something like: Notify me of comments 
on Validation/Invalidation.



I was also further talking about being able to optionally "subscribe" to 
comments on any task square, by checking a box.


Cheers,
Blake


On 8/29/2014 12:47 PM, Nick Allen wrote:

Hi,

I was recently involved in teaching a large group of new mappers, and
close to the end of the session I repeated to them how to find the
squares they have mapped, click on them, and see the comments that the
validator had left. At the end of the session I was approached by
representatives of both the British Red Cross & Medecins Sans Frontier
who each commented that it seemed like a long process, and couldn't it
be automated so that a message is automatically sent to the mapper
concerned. At the time, I replied that the many hundreds of very good
mappers would not want a pestering email every time one of their
hundreds of squares was validated.

However, on further reflection I am having second thoughts, but don't
know if;

a/. there is something already in the pipeline, &
b/. what other HOTties have in the way of ideas about this.

I should explain that I see validation as both a quality control
feature, and a training aid. Rather than invalidate, I will frequently
validate a square if it only involves work I can complete in a few
minutes, and I will leave a message in the square something like 'Click
on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0
I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present
- screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut.
etc..'   In this case it would obviously be good if there was an
option within the Tasking manager that allowed me to send this as a
message to the mapper concerned rather than leave it to chance as to
whether it is ever seen. If this feature was implemented I would suggest
that it was a tick box that the validator would have to select with the
text similar to 'Tick this box if you require your comments to be sent
as part of a message to the mapper concerned'.

The ticking of the box & then confirming with the validate button would
cause a message (email or OSM messaging system) with a preformed text
such as
_

Title=HOT Validators feedback, square @@@

Hi & thanks for mapping for the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team,

A validator has recently validated square @@ which you
marked as complete on @@date@@ & has asked that the following comments
are passed on to you;

/Click on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after:
//https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0//
I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present
- screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut. etc../

Please take these comments in the positive way they were intended. The
Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team would like to see you map many more
squares & the comments are only intended to keep the mapping standards high.

Keep up the good work, and thanks again for mapping for HOT.

This is an automated message.
_

There was a genuine interest from members of BRC & MSF when asking me
about this, and there was an offer to help with the coding as well.
Personally something like this would save me a lot of time - I'm
currently trying to validate the work of about 60 new mappers and
anything which speeds up the process would really help.

I'd welcome some discussion on this.

--

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk
)



___
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] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[Claire Halleux]

+1 for the "Notify me of comments" checkbox suggestion.


On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 9:10 PM, Blake Girardot  wrote:

>
> I just want to make sure I understand this:
>
> We are just talking about getting an email for squares that we personally
> have marked as "completed" when it gets validated or invalidated, not for
> every square that gets validated.
>
> Or, as an alternative:
>
> Every square that we have personally marked as completed AND that we have
> checked a box for that says something like: Notify me of comments on
> Validation/Invalidation.
>
>
> I was also further talking about being able to optionally "subscribe" to
> comments on any task square, by checking a box.
>
> Cheers,
> Blake
>
>
>
> On 8/29/2014 12:47 PM, Nick Allen wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was recently involved in teaching a large group of new mappers, and
>> close to the end of the session I repeated to them how to find the
>> squares they have mapped, click on them, and see the comments that the
>> validator had left. At the end of the session I was approached by
>> representatives of both the British Red Cross & Medecins Sans Frontier
>> who each commented that it seemed like a long process, and couldn't it
>> be automated so that a message is automatically sent to the mapper
>> concerned. At the time, I replied that the many hundreds of very good
>> mappers would not want a pestering email every time one of their
>> hundreds of squares was validated.
>>
>> However, on further reflection I am having second thoughts, but don't
>> know if;
>>
>> a/. there is something already in the pipeline, &
>> b/. what other HOTties have in the way of ideas about this.
>>
>> I should explain that I see validation as both a quality control
>> feature, and a training aid. Rather than invalidate, I will frequently
>> validate a square if it only involves work I can complete in a few
>> minutes, and I will leave a message in the square something like 'Click
>> on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after:
>> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0
>> I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present
>> - screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut.
>> etc..'   In this case it would obviously be good if there was an
>> option within the Tasking manager that allowed me to send this as a
>> message to the mapper concerned rather than leave it to chance as to
>> whether it is ever seen. If this feature was implemented I would suggest
>> that it was a tick box that the validator would have to select with the
>> text similar to 'Tick this box if you require your comments to be sent
>> as part of a message to the mapper concerned'.
>>
>> The ticking of the box & then confirming with the validate button would
>> cause a message (email or OSM messaging system) with a preformed text
>> such as
>> _
>>
>> Title=HOT Validators feedback, square @@@
>>
>> Hi & thanks for mapping for the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team,
>>
>> A validator has recently validated square @@ which you
>> marked as complete on @@date@@ & has asked that the following comments
>> are passed on to you;
>>
>> /Click on this link to see screenshots showing the before & after:
>> //https://www.dropbox.com/sh/8mtspy7pfu4o0ve/AADSV7Z-
>> ZGG0kCWatPqUdnLYa?dl=0//
>>
>> I've joined the paths together & added the round huts that were present
>> - screenshot shows one of them & they are tagged building=hut. etc../
>>
>>
>> Please take these comments in the positive way they were intended. The
>> Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team would like to see you map many more
>> squares & the comments are only intended to keep the mapping standards
>> high.
>>
>> Keep up the good work, and thanks again for mapping for HOT.
>>
>> This is an automated message.
>> _
>>
>> There was a genuine interest from members of BRC & MSF when asking me
>> about this, and there was an offer to help with the coding as well.
>> Personally something like this would save me a lot of time - I'm
>> currently trying to validate the work of about 60 new mappers and
>> anything which speeds up the process would really help.
>>
>> I'd welcome some discussion on this.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy
>>
>> Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for
>> http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk
>> )
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>



-- 
Claire Halleu

[HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[Severin Menard]

Hi all,

Thinking aloud, would not be possible (actually asking tech people) to have
a tool allwing the following:
- detecting changesets with hotosm hashtags and picking up the username
- comparing the username to a list of HOTOSM contributors and stating if it
is new or not and already validated for a certain numbers of quality items
(like drawing buildings correctly, drawing roads correctly, tagging roads
correctly, etc.)
- when contributors have not been validated yet, a task is sent to a
validation team
- one team member picks up the task, check, validate the work of the
contributor and contact her/him if some mistakes. A form would be great,
with checkboxes for typical errors, and if making a typical one, the
contributor would receive in the answer link to the Learning point (there
are already quite a few in LearnOSM) dedicated to this error
- once done the hotosm contributor quality status for this contributor
would be: good for such and such aspects, bad for such and such ones and
the latter would then be tasked in the future for validators as soon as
this contributor would submit a new changeset

Thoughts?

Sincerely,

Severin


On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Nick Allen  wrote:

>  Pierre,
>
> A help channel or some form social help channel would be good, but in
> order to ask for help, the mapper needs to realise they are doing something
> wrong, or don't know how to do something.
>
> The new mappers in this thread are consistently asking for someone to
> check their work, and provide feedback so they know what to do to improve.
> The validation process is good for this as well as quality control - but it
> would be nice if we made it easier for the new mapper to receive the
> comments, and if needed for the validator to pass them.
>
> I don't know if it is easily achievable, but perhaps a system where the
> validators comments are more easily available to the mapper, unless they
> opt to not receive them. I know that MSF & BRC were keen to offer help, and
> I know that the few mappers that have replied to this thread are asking for
> this feedback.
>
> It would be good if more mappers replied, especially if they are new, so
> we have an idea as to whether it is worth investigating further.
>
> Regards
>
> Nick (Tallguy)
> --
>
> Nick
>
> Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy
>
> Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for
> http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk)
>
> ___
> 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] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[AYTOUN RALPH]

Hi all,

I was very grateful when I was contacted and made aware of an issue that I
was unaware of as a beginner and it has helped me to improve my input.

I believe it is necessary to be able to give this kind of constructive
assistance to those who are giving their time and contributions to the
project. I do not believe it is necessary to be notified of every tile that
gets validated but definitely would want to know if my tile has been
invalidated so that I can go back and resolve any issues, especially if I
am informed of how to go about doing that.

Because of the nature of the work in HOT a lot of it is just repetitive
building work which can be quite monotonous and is not appealing to
everyone that gives it a go, so we have to be understanding about that and
accept that many will fall by the wayside. What would be helpful is for
some way of quickly identifying those who do come back repeatedly and
nurturing them. Approaching them to identify how to improve their input and
also expand their range of abilities to become more effective.

The instructions in the new Tasking Manager has become more helpful with
the addition of links to a specific imagery (some with acknowledgements).
Additional assistance for starters would be links to instructions on the
building tools and how to use them, a link to the tags (eg Africa Highways)
specific to that task to avoid tags such as 'huts' instead of 'buildings',
to explain the *house=construction *tag, etc. Explanations clarifying
things like a river crossing a road (Africa Highways) where the tag
*ford=yes* is offered as the default, as there are no culverts, helped to
reduce validation problems.

Do we have a section that covers commonly asked questions, a link to that
in the instructions section would help newcomers with difficulties as they
would most likely encounter similar problems as they develop their skills.

Just a few of my experiences and thoughts.

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

[HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[Mikel Maron]

Severin

I like the ideas here. Essentially, we're talking about calculating and
recording mappers "reputation", and then incorporating into handling of
validation.

"How did you contribute" http://hdyc.neis-one.org/ is one example of
reputation calculation. It's entirely automated. Your suggesting to add
specific, manually recorded feedback on a users specific edits. A
prerequisite would be to categorize OSMTM taks by the general kind of work
required, which could have other benefits (like standardizing instructions).

I wonder if we could have the same result, to focus validator efforts and
give feedback to mappers, by simply using the HDYC reputation calculation
("Type of Mapper"). Are most cases of mistakes in HOT jobs from relatively
new mappers to OSM? Or do we also see experienced OSM-ers making mistakes
in unfamiliar terrain?

In any case, the work on the OSMTM2 API could help. We can then more easily
analyse active jobs, by querying and maybe even setting status through the
API.



Another idea I've been mulling over is "microtasking" validation. The idea
is to make in depth validation easier; it seems that validation is not so
popular or easy with our current tools.

Split up the validation, of say buildings over a task square, into
individual building microtasks. A contributor simply marks whether the
building was drawn correctly, or not. This should only take a few seconds,
and could involve large numbers of people in a very simple task. The
collective microtask results of a task square could then be used to guide
selective in depth validation.

-Mikel

On Sunday, August 31, 2014 3:09 AM, Severin Menard 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Thinking aloud, would not be possible (actually asking tech people) to
have a tool allwing the
> following:
> - detecting changesets with hotosm hashtags and picking up the username
> - comparing the username to a list of HOTOSM contributors and stating if
it is new or not and
> already validated for a certain numbers of quality items (like drawing
buildings correctly, drawing
> roads correctly, tagging roads correctly, etc.)
> - when contributors have not been validated yet, a task is sent to a
validation team
> - one team member picks up the task, check, validate the work of the
contributor and contact
> her/him if some mistakes. A form would be great, with checkboxes for
typical errors, and if
> making a typical one, the contributor would receive in the answer link to
the Learning point (there
> are already quite a few in LearnOSM) dedicated to this error
> - once done the hotosm contributor quality status for this contributor
would be: good for such and
> such aspects, bad for such and such ones and the latter would then be
tasked in the future for
> validators as soon as this contributor would submit a new changeset
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Severin
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[Nick Allen]

llateoz,

I think you're probably right. There is a danger that nothing will 
happen because so many people have good ideas that no decision is reached.


I will see if I can raise the requests at the Training Working Group & I 
see it has already appeared in the Activation Working Group agenda.


It would be really good to hear from someone technical who could comment 
on how easy it would be to implement in a reasonable timescale any of 
the ideas (I could still approach British Red Cross &/or Medecins Sans 
Frontier who offered technical help if it was wanted - but I don't want 
to tread on toes & at the moment I'm not sure we clearly know what the 
mappers actually want / need). I think in TM2 the HOT mappers have been 
given a very good piece of software & I wouldn't want to see anything 
produced which would affect it's performance.


It appears as if there are two phases (I'm deliberately trying to keep 
this vague to allow adaptation);
a/. Mappers would like to easily see any validation comments on their 
mapping, and,
b/. Some form of help channel / help desk / FAQ - various very good 
ideas for means of providing this have been put forward.


Regards

Nick
(Tallguy)

On 01/09/14 14:03, latte wrote:
I  actually think we're overthinking this issue.  The first few 
suggestions that were made were on the money - that mappers can have 
the ability to receive feedback on squares they complete, by ticking 
an opt-in box when they complete a task.  Validators can then provide 
valuable feedback to new and longstanding mappers alike.


I have dabbled in IRC in the past, but now that I tend to use a 
graphic based environment, I find IRC very draining and sometimes hard 
to follow. The task manager provides such a clean welcoming interface, 
that it seems a backward step to have to refer to IRC to ask 
questions.  I have found ways of checking back on tasks I complete 
through stats, and I have found how to message the author of an object 
by sourcing their nickname through JOSM, authors. This has allowed me 
to provide some feedback, but I'm not sure how the 'experienced' 
community deals with mappers who regularly make the same errors or 
poorly interpret aerial images.


IMO I would like the opportunity to give and receive feedback on tasks 
that I complete/validate. Perhaps add a 'Mark as Done - request 
feedback' button, or a check box for each task.  Validators could then 
have 'invalidate - provide feedback' and 'validate - provide feedback' 
buttons, or check boxes that would include comments they have made on 
the task.


I am really wanting to get feedback on the work that I'm completing, 
but don't know the best way to request this so I hope we can reach a 
solution soon.


Regards

latteoz


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



--

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team


http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for 
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk 
)


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

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - a send message button?

[Blake Girardot]

On 9/1/2014 9:03 AM, latte wrote:


I have dabbled in IRC in the past, but now that I tend to use a graphic
based environment, I find IRC very draining and sometimes hard to
follow.


I am curious if you have tried the web browser irc client?

It is no more difficult or challenging than any text based exchange 
(email, IM, SMS), no separate client needed, no need for irc commands.


Maybe just give it a look if you get a few seconds.

http://irc.openstreetmap.org/

Text based, immediate help is gaining popularity across the web because 
people find it easier than the phone or emails to support. For example 
here is one survey that supports that premise:


https://econsultancy.com/blog/63867-consumers-prefer-live-chat-for-customer-service-stats

I am not suggesting anything complicated, just a link in the tasking 
manager main panel that lets people know about the hot email list and 
the hot web based irc channel.


Cheers,
Blake

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

Re: [HOT] Validating - Take a Task at Random

[Ralf Stephan]

IMHO, the task manager shouldn't automatically assign validation tasks. The
potential problems outweigh any benefits from that feature.

Regards,

On Tue, 11 Nov 2014 19:33 Nick Allen  wrote:

>  Hi,
>
> For info of all who are consciously validating squares (& a few who may
> not realise they have been validating).
>
> I've been contacted concerning one of the very successful recent
> mapathons. A little research after the event has shown that several squares
> of at least one project have been marked as validated by mappers extremely
> new to the system - unfortunately the squares are not up to standard and
> more work is taking place to correct this.
>
> We think that the likely scenario is - When all squares of a project are
> either complete or locked by another mapper, Tasking Manager will allocate
> you a square to validate - if you are extremely new to the system you
> probably will not realise what has happened and will look round the square
> & then add a brief comment before marking the square as done. Having spoken
> at several mapathons, and listened to other mappers giving guidance I know
> that;
> a/. you can't say everything before letting someone start, &
> b/. even if you did they probably wouldn't remember it all anyway.
>
> I've added to the entry on the tasking manager in learnOSM - link is
> http://learnosm.org/en/coordination/tasking-manager/#contribute-tab & I
> ask that validators just bear this in mind - have a quick look at the
> usernames of others who have validated within the project you are working
> on, and be prepared to reopen squares that may have already been validated
> if there are problems. I'm not talking about 'they missed one building in
> the middle of 200', I'm talking about buildings should have been traced,
> there were hundreds, but none were traced!
>
> I can see how easy a mistake it is to make, and I think it's something we
> should be aware of and try to negate in the future. Meanwhile I suggest
> that if you find one, send a message to the mapper concerned including the
> above link.
>
> To my knowledge there has never been a decision about what qualifications
> are required before someone validates, and I'm not sure there is an answer
> to that - a few of my thoughts;
> 1. I've checked up on one validator who had (at the time I checked) never
> completed a square - extremely good mapper with lots of experience in other
> areas of mapping, and gives good feedback - if it's you, keep up the good
> work, thanks.
> 2. I found someone mapping on the day their OSM username was issued. Their
> mapping was obviously well beyond the standard we expect of a new mapper.
> On sending a message I established they wanted a new username to use whilst
> mapping for HOT - I asked them to start validating. Again, keep up the good
> work, thanks.
> 3. I'm still learning.
>
> Perhaps this is something for discussion at one of the working groups.
> --
>
> Nick
>
> Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy
>
> Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for
> http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk)
>  ___
> 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] Validating - Take a Task at Random

[Andrew Buck]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Yeah, this definitely is an issue, 'take a random task' should not
offer validation squares.

As for criteria on who can validate, it might be worth setting up
something like you need to have completed at least 5 squares and had
at least one validated after you were the last mapper to lock the
square (meaning when you marked it complete it really was complete,
not just finished by someone else).

- -AndrewBuck

On 11/12/2014 01:55 AM, Ralf Stephan wrote:
> IMHO, the task manager shouldn't automatically assign validation
> tasks. The potential problems outweigh any benefits from that
> feature.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> On Tue, 11 Nov 2014 19:33 Nick Allen 
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> For info of all who are consciously validating squares (& a few
>> who may not realise they have been validating).
>> 
>> I've been contacted concerning one of the very successful recent 
>> mapathons. A little research after the event has shown that
>> several squares of at least one project have been marked as
>> validated by mappers extremely new to the system - unfortunately
>> the squares are not up to standard and more work is taking place
>> to correct this.
>> 
>> We think that the likely scenario is - When all squares of a
>> project are either complete or locked by another mapper, Tasking
>> Manager will allocate you a square to validate - if you are
>> extremely new to the system you probably will not realise what
>> has happened and will look round the square & then add a brief
>> comment before marking the square as done. Having spoken at
>> several mapathons, and listened to other mappers giving guidance
>> I know that; a/. you can't say everything before letting someone
>> start, & b/. even if you did they probably wouldn't remember it
>> all anyway.
>> 
>> I've added to the entry on the tasking manager in learnOSM - link
>> is 
>> http://learnosm.org/en/coordination/tasking-manager/#contribute-tab
>> & I ask that validators just bear this in mind - have a quick
>> look at the usernames of others who have validated within the
>> project you are working on, and be prepared to reopen squares
>> that may have already been validated if there are problems. I'm
>> not talking about 'they missed one building in the middle of
>> 200', I'm talking about buildings should have been traced, there
>> were hundreds, but none were traced!
>> 
>> I can see how easy a mistake it is to make, and I think it's
>> something we should be aware of and try to negate in the future.
>> Meanwhile I suggest that if you find one, send a message to the
>> mapper concerned including the above link.
>> 
>> To my knowledge there has never been a decision about what
>> qualifications are required before someone validates, and I'm not
>> sure there is an answer to that - a few of my thoughts; 1. I've
>> checked up on one validator who had (at the time I checked)
>> never completed a square - extremely good mapper with lots of
>> experience in other areas of mapping, and gives good feedback -
>> if it's you, keep up the good work, thanks. 2. I found someone
>> mapping on the day their OSM username was issued. Their mapping
>> was obviously well beyond the standard we expect of a new
>> mapper. On sending a message I established they wanted a new
>> username to use whilst mapping for HOT - I asked them to start
>> validating. Again, keep up the good work, thanks. 3. I'm still
>> learning.
>> 
>> Perhaps this is something for discussion at one of the working
>> groups. --
>> 
>> Nick
>> 
>> Volunteer 'Tallguy' for 
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team
>> 
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy
>> 
>> Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for 
>> http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/
>> (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk) 
>> ___ 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 v1
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=8S9U
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
HOT mailing list
HOT

Re: [HOT] Validating - Take a Task at Random

[Ray Kiddy]

On Wed, 12 Nov 2014 09:28:11 -0600
Andrew Buck  wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Yeah, this definitely is an issue, 'take a random task' should not
> offer validation squares.
> 

I did not see this issue in the TM's issue list. Just FYI.

https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/446

cheers - ray

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

Re: [HOT] Validating - Take a Task at Random

[Andrew Buck]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Oh yeah, sorry for the confusing terminology.  I meant 'issue' as in
'a problem' not that there was a ticket on github already.  In any
case, thanks for opening one.

- -AndrewBuck

On 11/12/2014 01:50 PM, Ray Kiddy wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2014 09:28:11 -0600 Andrew Buck
>  wrote:
> 
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> Yeah, this definitely is an issue, 'take a random task' should
>> not offer validation squares.
>> 
> 
> I did not see this issue in the TM's issue list. Just FYI.
> 
> https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/446
> 
> cheers - ray
> 
> ___ HOT mailing list 
> HOT@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
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=NpHH
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[Dan S]

Hi Severin,

Sounds like a nice approach. However the first two steps are unneeded
- we can detect new users when they mark squares as done, not via
changeset hashtags. In my experience newcomers often forget to tag
changesets, so your approach would miss many of them - yet we already
know their username within the Tasking Manager.

Also I'm not keen on the idea of marking users as "bad for such and
such". It would be better simply to have neutral state plus "good for
such and such".

Best
Dan


2014-08-31 8:07 GMT+01:00 Severin Menard :
> Hi all,
>
> Thinking aloud, would not be possible (actually asking tech people) to have
> a tool allwing the following:
> - detecting changesets with hotosm hashtags and picking up the username
> - comparing the username to a list of HOTOSM contributors and stating if it
> is new or not and already validated for a certain numbers of quality items
> (like drawing buildings correctly, drawing roads correctly, tagging roads
> correctly, etc.)
> - when contributors have not been validated yet, a task is sent to a
> validation team
> - one team member picks up the task, check, validate the work of the
> contributor and contact her/him if some mistakes. A form would be great,
> with checkboxes for typical errors, and if making a typical one, the
> contributor would receive in the answer link to the Learning point (there
> are already quite a few in LearnOSM) dedicated to this error
> - once done the hotosm contributor quality status for this contributor would
> be: good for such and such aspects, bad for such and such ones and the
> latter would then be tasked in the future for validators as soon as this
> contributor would submit a new changeset
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Severin
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Nick Allen  wrote:
>>
>> Pierre,
>>
>> A help channel or some form social help channel would be good, but in
>> order to ask for help, the mapper needs to realise they are doing something
>> wrong, or don't know how to do something.
>>
>> The new mappers in this thread are consistently asking for someone to
>> check their work, and provide feedback so they know what to do to improve.
>> The validation process is good for this as well as quality control - but it
>> would be nice if we made it easier for the new mapper to receive the
>> comments, and if needed for the validator to pass them.
>>
>> I don't know if it is easily achievable, but perhaps a system where the
>> validators comments are more easily available to the mapper, unless they opt
>> to not receive them. I know that MSF & BRC were keen to offer help, and I
>> know that the few mappers that have replied to this thread are asking for
>> this feedback.
>>
>> It would be good if more mappers replied, especially if they are new, so
>> we have an idea as to whether it is worth investigating further.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nick (Tallguy)
>> --
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy
>>
>> Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for
>> http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk)
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[Pierre Béland]

I would not publish rating of users based on evaluation of their mapping. This 
is an information to use to contact them or to see elements to develop in 
learning material.


The OSM API lets extract changesets for an user, a specific bbox and time span. 
This way, we can catch all the user contributions for a 
Task bbox, even if he did not use a hashtag in the Changeset comment.
 
Pierre 




 De : Dan S 
À : "hot@openstreetmap.org"  
Envoyé le : Dimanche 31 août 2014 13h47
Objet : Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers
 

Hi Severin,

Sounds like a nice approach. However the first two steps are unneeded
- we can detect new users when they mark squares as done, not via
changeset hashtags. In my experience newcomers often forget to tag
changesets, so your approach would miss many of them - yet we already
know their username within the Tasking Manager.

Also I'm not keen on the idea of marking users as "bad for such and
such". It would be better simply to have neutral state plus "good for
such and such".

Best
Dan


2014-08-31 8:07 GMT+01:00 Severin Menard :
> Hi all,
>
> Thinking aloud, would not be possible (actually asking tech people) to have
> a tool allwing the following:
> - detecting changesets with hotosm hashtags and picking up the username
> - comparing the username to a list of HOTOSM contributors and stating if it
> is new or not and already validated for a certain numbers of quality items
> (like drawing buildings correctly, drawing roads correctly, tagging roads
> correctly, etc.)
> - when contributors have not been validated yet, a task is sent to a
> validation team
> - one team member picks up the task, check, validate the work of the
> contributor and contact her/him if some mistakes. A form would be great,
> with checkboxes for typical errors, and if making a typical one, the
> contributor would receive in the answer link to the Learning point (there
> are already quite a few in LearnOSM) dedicated to this error
> - once done the hotosm contributor quality status for this contributor would
> be: good for such and such aspects, bad for such and such ones and the
> latter would then be tasked in the future for validators as soon as this
> contributor would submit a new changeset
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Severin
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Nick Allen  wrote:
>>
>> Pierre,
>>
>> A help channel or some form social help channel would be good, but in
>> order to ask for help, the mapper needs to realise they are doing something
>> wrong, or don't know how to do something.
>>
>> The new mappers in this thread are consistently asking for someone to
>> check their work, and provide feedback so they know what to do to improve.
>> The validation process is good for this as well as quality control - but it
>> would be nice if we made it easier for the new mapper to receive the
>> comments, and if needed for the validator to pass them.
>>
>> I don't know if it is easily achievable, but perhaps a system where the
>> validators comments are more easily available to the mapper, unless they opt
>> to not receive them. I know that MSF & BRC were keen to offer help, and I
>> know that the few mappers that have replied to this thread are asking for
>> this feedback.
>>
>> It would be good if more mappers replied, especially if they are new, so
>> we have an idea as to whether it is worth investigating further.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nick (Tallguy)
>> --
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy
>>
>> Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for
>> http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk)
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[David Schmitt]

Hi,

gamification seems to be a hot trend lately. My understanding of this 
is a clear communication of (community) goals and closing the feedback 
cycle to individual contributors. Counting validated squares may be a 
good proxy for a user's efficiency. It may not be the most finegrained, 
and lead to people trying to game the system. Also, like Dan S said, 
only reinforce positive contributions, non-improving contributions 
require a learning impulse and vandalism should be handled quietly.


I also like Mikel's idea of microtasking validation. I'd guess that 
scoring an individual building on a green/yellow/red scale in a 
specifically designed webapp to reduce effort would be much easier than 
working with josm+browser and trying to judge whole squares. Also it 
might improve the feedback as in "This building should be drawn square 
on the foundations, not including it's roof's shadow."



Regards, David

On 2014-08-31 09:07, Severin Menard wrote:

Hi all,

Thinking aloud, would not be possible (actually asking tech people) 
to

have a tool allwing the following:
- detecting changesets with hotosm hashtags and picking up the
username
 - comparing the username to a list of HOTOSM contributors and 
stating

if it is new or not and already validated for a certain numbers of
quality items (like drawing buildings correctly, drawing roads
correctly, tagging roads correctly, etc.)
 - when contributors have not been validated yet, a task is sent to a
validation team
- one team member picks up the task, check, validate the work of the
contributor and contact her/him if some mistakes. A form would be
great, with checkboxes for typical errors, and if making a typical
one, the contributor would receive in the answer link to the Learning
point (there are already quite a few in LearnOSM) dedicated to this
error
 - once done the hotosm contributor quality status for this
contributor would be: good for such and such aspects, bad for such 
and

such ones and the latter would then be tasked in the future for
validators as soon as this contributor would submit a new changeset

Thoughts?

Sincerely,

Severin

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Nick Allen  wrote:


Pierre,

A help channel or some form social help channel would be good, but
in order to ask for help, the mapper needs to realise they are doing
something wrong, or dont know how to do something.

The new mappers in this thread are consistently asking for someone
to check their work, and provide feedback so they know what to do to
improve. The validation process is good for this as well as quality
control - but it would be nice if we made it easier for the new
mapper to receive the comments, and if needed for the validator to
pass them.

I dont know if it is easily achievable, but perhaps a system where
the validators comments are more easily available to the mapper,
unless they opt to not receive them. I know that MSF & BRC were keen
to offer help, and I know that the few mappers that have replied to
this thread are asking for this feedback.

It would be good if more mappers replied, especially if they are
new, so we have an idea as to whether it is worth investigating
further.

Regards

Nick (Tallguy)

--

Nick

Volunteer Tallguy for
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team [1]

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy [2]

Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ [3]
(treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk [4])
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org [5]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot [6]




Links:
--
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team
[2] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy
[3] http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/
[4] mailto:treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk
[5] mailto:HOT@openstreetmap.org
[6] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
[7] mailto:nick.allen...@gmail.com



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

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[Nick Allen]

To all who have, Thank you for contributing to this thread.

Although I had been mapping for several years before I started mapping 
with HOT, I found my needs were similar to those described by others. I 
found myself trying to interpret satellite imagery without the benefit 
of having visited the area. In particular I started to realise that a 
lot of the mapping was not to do with what you could actually see, but 
what you could infer from it - highways are continuous despite the fact 
that trees get in the way. Round things that looked like bushes but had 
a funny shadow & worn ground around their bases were actually round 
huts, etc. etc.  In short, I needed someone to look at my mapping and 
say something like 'You're getting there, but you need to ...'.  
I mapped a lot, and nearly gave up because I didn't know if the mapping 
I was doing was actually any good, or if it was so bad that it was 
actually a hindrance.


Although it's possible to make even more errors if you have never mapped 
before, I feel that mapping for HOT is different to mapping the boring 
tarmac & brick houses of my home town, where I have the benefit of 
having walked, cycled & driven the area. An 'experienced' mapper may 
need the feedback as much as a new mapper.


I've now stood in front of several groups who wish to learn mapping for 
HOT, and I have stressed that they can get feedback about their mapping 
by looking at the validators comments (actually you don't need anything 
in the way of a comment, just so long as the square is checked and turns 
green, or is invalidated & you get a message.) The instructions go 
something like (I try to have pretty pictures as well!);

1. On the TM homepage, click in the box marked [] Your projects
2. Go to the stats tab of one of the projects you have completed squares 
in, and scroll through the list until you find your username - hover the 
mouse over your username & the squares you have marked as complete will 
be the only ones visible - click on one of the squares that has gone 
green & you will see the comments the validator has left.
3. You need to repeat this for every square you have completed, 
individually, and
4. You need to repeat this for each project, and for each of the squares 
in it.

!

Taking on board the comments & suggestions made by various people 
earlier in this thread, could someone please make it that I say;
"Click on the big green button on the TM homepage that says 'Show me the 
feedback for any of my squares that have been validated', and when you 
click on it it takes you to a web page with

date . Square ID . Validators comment
date . Square ID . Validators comment
date . Square ID . Validators comment
date . Square ID . Validators comment
date . Square ID . Validators comment
etc

Although i like the idea of detailed stats., I think that anyone who 
manages to get started with HOT is capable of being a very good mapper 
given the right guidance & feedback, and I would not like statistics to 
stand in the way of that.


Thanks for reading.

Nick
(Tallguy)

On 31/08/14 18:47, Dan S wrote:

Hi Severin,

Sounds like a nice approach. However the first two steps are unneeded
- we can detect new users when they mark squares as done, not via
changeset hashtags. In my experience newcomers often forget to tag
changesets, so your approach would miss many of them - yet we already
know their username within the Tasking Manager.

Also I'm not keen on the idea of marking users as "bad for such and
such". It would be better simply to have neutral state plus "good for
such and such".

Best
Dan


2014-08-31 8:07 GMT+01:00 Severin Menard :

Hi all,

Thinking aloud, would not be possible (actually asking tech people) to have
a tool allwing the following:
- detecting changesets with hotosm hashtags and picking up the username
- comparing the username to a list of HOTOSM contributors and stating if it
is new or not and already validated for a certain numbers of quality items
(like drawing buildings correctly, drawing roads correctly, tagging roads
correctly, etc.)
- when contributors have not been validated yet, a task is sent to a
validation team
- one team member picks up the task, check, validate the work of the
contributor and contact her/him if some mistakes. A form would be great,
with checkboxes for typical errors, and if making a typical one, the
contributor would receive in the answer link to the Learning point (there
are already quite a few in LearnOSM) dedicated to this error
- once done the hotosm contributor quality status for this contributor would
be: good for such and such aspects, bad for such and such ones and the
latter would then be tasked in the future for validators as soon as this
contributor would submit a new changeset

Thoughts?

Sincerely,

Severin


On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Nick Allen  wrote:

Pierre,

A help channel or some form social help channel would be good, but in
order to ask for help, the mapper needs to realise they

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

On the subject of validation.

As someone who now spends most of their mapping time validating, I think 
we 'sell' it the wrong way. I only use the validation button in JOSM now 
if I think I am going to find something, and generally use the 
HOT-Validate paint Style (Well worth trying if you're a JOSM user, even 
if you don't validate). But I think even that is too much of a 
requirement. I have seen some excellent mapping by iD & Potlatch users & 
I would like to see some of them carrying out validating - if they are 
capable of mapping to such a high standard then they are perfectly 
capable of zooming in to look at others work & saying 'yes', 'yes but', 
or 'no'. I rarely use the 'no' option and to be honest it could just as 
easily be an experienced mapper because it generally means there is a 
significant portion of the square not mapped (I like to think the 
imagery didn't load properly & that was why they missed the village 
entirely!)


Mapping =
I'd like to see us rewrite the manuals, wiki's, slideshows etc., so they 
show mapping for HOT needs roads connected, traced at a suitable scale & 
classed more or less correctly (I don't think we should get too hung up 
about this - its often only when you are looking at an area of several 
squares in size that you can work out which are the primary, secondary, 
tertiary etc - get it traced, tag what it looks like & make sure that 
someone with an overview alters the tags later if need be). Buildings 
square or round and as accurate as they can be within reason. Rivers 
traced. leisure= common & amenity=school where appropriate - anything 
else specific to the project.


Validating=
Make sure that Mapping = was done ok.

It would be good to offer variety to our mappers & validating, if sold 
correctly, is not difficult & can be very rewarding. 99% of the time I'm 
making comments like 'All looks good, thanks'. Occasionally it's 
something like 'Looks good, but can you join the roads to each other & 
not the landuse=residential boundary. I've sorted it this time', I 
worried for a while about sending messages to mappers about ways they 
could improve, but the feedback I've had from those concerned has been 
good, and I make sure I only send a message if it's obvious the person 
is making the same mistake consistently - a point in case being round 
huts which are not obvious unless someone points them out. (wiki entry 
about validating 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data 
if I've interested you).


I'd still like a tick box in the TM so that when I want to send my 
comments to the mapper, I can easily do so. But I don't think that is as 
important as allowing mappers easier access to the validators comments.


Just a few thoughts -  by the way, I'd welcome help from anyone who 
fancies doing more validating! If you'd like it, I'm quite happy to 
validate your validations until you feel more confident.


--

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team


http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for 
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasu...@6thswanleyscouts.org.uk 
)


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

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[Mark Cupitt]

Hi all, I have been a bit quiet, just coming back on line after one month
recovering form a Motor Bike Crash. Seems I am not as invincible as I
thought :)

Nick +1 for your comments, I totally agree. I also think and Opt In or Opt
Out Check Box "Please send me comments" on the Task for each User, or On
the Users Profile for all Tasks would be of a lot of use. Some users may
want feedback whilst some may not. The Validator then knows he is welcome
to provide feedback, tips and tricks which is a fantastic way of sharing
knowledge. To help police inappropriate Validation Comments, a "Report This
Validation Message" Button could be to be sent to someone in HOT to review
so that the system is not abused, as pretty much anyone could can be a
Validator.

Feedback from Validators provides a fantastic opportunity to learn,
especially for new users and the dialog that is created can only be of huge
benefit to those people who want it. When I started, I certainly would have
asked for feedback. Andrew B gave me a huge amount of help via mumble on
all sorts of tips and tricks .. and helped bring me closer to the HOT
Community in a lot of ways .

Cheers
Mark

Cheers

Mark


Regards

Mark Cupitt

"If we change the world, let it bear the mark of our intelligence"

Hire Me on Freelancer

See me on Open StreetMap 

See me on LinkedIn 


*See me on StackExchange *

===
The contents of this email are intended only for the individual(s) to whom
it is addressed and may contain
confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended
recipient, you must not disclose, copy, distribute,
or use the contents of this email. If you have received this email in
error, please notify the sender immediately and
delete the email and any attachments.
===



On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Nick Allen  wrote:

>  Hi,
>
> On the subject of validation.
>
> As someone who now spends most of their mapping time validating, I think
> we 'sell' it the wrong way. I only use the validation button in JOSM now if
> I think I am going to find something, and generally use the HOT-Validate
> paint Style (Well worth trying if you're a JOSM user, even if you don't
> validate). But I think even that is too much of a requirement. I have seen
> some excellent mapping by iD & Potlatch users & I would like to see some of
> them carrying out validating - if they are capable of mapping to such a
> high standard then they are perfectly capable of zooming in to look at
> others work & saying 'yes', 'yes but', or 'no'. I rarely use the 'no'
> option and to be honest it could just as easily be an experienced mapper
> because it generally means there is a significant portion of the square not
> mapped (I like to think the imagery didn't load properly & that was why
> they missed the village entirely!)
>
> Mapping =
> I'd like to see us rewrite the manuals, wiki's, slideshows etc., so they
> show mapping for HOT needs roads connected, traced at a suitable scale &
> classed more or less correctly (I don't think we should get too hung up
> about this - its often only when you are looking at an area of several
> squares in size that you can work out which are the primary, secondary,
> tertiary etc - get it traced, tag what it looks like & make sure that
> someone with an overview alters the tags later if need be). Buildings
> square or round and as accurate as they can be within reason. Rivers
> traced. leisure= common & amenity=school where appropriate - anything else
> specific to the project.
>
> Validating=
> Make sure that Mapping = was done ok.
>
> It would be good to offer variety to our mappers & validating, if sold
> correctly, is not difficult & can be very rewarding. 99% of the time I'm
> making comments like 'All looks good, thanks'. Occasionally it's something
> like 'Looks good, but can you join the roads to each other & not the
> landuse=residential boundary. I've sorted it this time', I worried for a
> while about sending messages to mappers about ways they could improve, but
> the feedback I've had from those concerned has been good, and I make sure I
> only send a message if it's obvious the person is making the same mistake
> consistently - a point in case being round huts which are not obvious
> unless someone points them out. (wiki entry about validating
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data if
> I've interested you).
>
> I'd still like a tick box in the TM so that when I want to send my
> comments to the mapper, I can easily do so. But I don't think that is as
> important as allowing mappers easier access to the validators comments.
>
> Just a few thoughts -  by the way, I'd welcome help from an

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[maning sambale]

There was a discussion several months ago proposing irc like client for
each job.  I think embedding synchronous communication for each job is a
good approach to providing real-time feedback to those working on a
specific project/job.

For some prior art, check out MapCraft [0].  Related tickets [1 and 2]

[0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MapCraft
[1] https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager/issues/148
[2] https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager/issues/40


On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Mark Cupitt  wrote:

> Hi all, I have been a bit quiet, just coming back on line after one month
> recovering form a Motor Bike Crash. Seems I am not as invincible as I
> thought :)
>
> Nick +1 for your comments, I totally agree. I also think and Opt In or Opt
> Out Check Box "Please send me comments" on the Task for each User, or On
> the Users Profile for all Tasks would be of a lot of use. Some users may
> want feedback whilst some may not. The Validator then knows he is welcome
> to provide feedback, tips and tricks which is a fantastic way of sharing
> knowledge. To help police inappropriate Validation Comments, a "Report This
> Validation Message" Button could be to be sent to someone in HOT to review
> so that the system is not abused, as pretty much anyone could can be a
> Validator.
>
> Feedback from Validators provides a fantastic opportunity to learn,
> especially for new users and the dialog that is created can only be of huge
> benefit to those people who want it. When I started, I certainly would have
> asked for feedback. Andrew B gave me a huge amount of help via mumble on
> all sorts of tips and tricks .. and helped bring me closer to the HOT
> Community in a lot of ways .
>
> Cheers
> Mark
>
> Cheers
>
> Mark
>
>
> Regards
>
> Mark Cupitt
>
> "If we change the world, let it bear the mark of our intelligence"
>
> Hire Me on Freelancer
>
> See me on Open StreetMap 
>
> See me on LinkedIn 
>
>
> *See me on StackExchange *
>
>
> ===
> The contents of this email are intended only for the individual(s) to whom
> it is addressed and may contain
> confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended
> recipient, you must not disclose, copy, distribute,
> or use the contents of this email. If you have received this email in
> error, please notify the sender immediately and
> delete the email and any attachments.
> ===
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Nick Allen 
> wrote:
>
>>  Hi,
>>
>> On the subject of validation.
>>
>> As someone who now spends most of their mapping time validating, I think
>> we 'sell' it the wrong way. I only use the validation button in JOSM now if
>> I think I am going to find something, and generally use the HOT-Validate
>> paint Style (Well worth trying if you're a JOSM user, even if you don't
>> validate). But I think even that is too much of a requirement. I have seen
>> some excellent mapping by iD & Potlatch users & I would like to see some of
>> them carrying out validating - if they are capable of mapping to such a
>> high standard then they are perfectly capable of zooming in to look at
>> others work & saying 'yes', 'yes but', or 'no'. I rarely use the 'no'
>> option and to be honest it could just as easily be an experienced mapper
>> because it generally means there is a significant portion of the square not
>> mapped (I like to think the imagery didn't load properly & that was why
>> they missed the village entirely!)
>>
>> Mapping =
>> I'd like to see us rewrite the manuals, wiki's, slideshows etc., so they
>> show mapping for HOT needs roads connected, traced at a suitable scale &
>> classed more or less correctly (I don't think we should get too hung up
>> about this - its often only when you are looking at an area of several
>> squares in size that you can work out which are the primary, secondary,
>> tertiary etc - get it traced, tag what it looks like & make sure that
>> someone with an overview alters the tags later if need be). Buildings
>> square or round and as accurate as they can be within reason. Rivers
>> traced. leisure= common & amenity=school where appropriate - anything else
>> specific to the project.
>>
>> Validating=
>> Make sure that Mapping = was done ok.
>>
>> It would be good to offer variety to our mappers & validating, if sold
>> correctly, is not difficult & can be very rewarding. 99% of the time I'm
>> making comments like 'All looks good, thanks'. Occasionally it's something
>> like 'Looks good, but can you join the roads to each other & not the
>> landuse=residential boundary. I've sorted it this time', I worried for a
>> while about sending messages to mappers about ways they could improve, but

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[Blake Girardot]

On 8/31/2014 10:09 PM, maning sambale wrote:

There was a discussion several months ago proposing irc like client for
each job.  I think embedding synchronous communication for each job is a
good approach to providing real-time feedback to those working on a
specific project/job.

For some prior art, check out MapCraft [0].  Related tickets [1 and 2]

[0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MapCraft
[1] https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager/issues/148
[2] https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager/issues/40



I think irc type channel per job might be to few people to help. The 
traffic in the current #hot irc channel is very sparse as it is.


If we could get new people and experienced people together now in the 
current hot irc channel that would be good progress, if for some reason 
it turned out to be over crowded we could look at a per 
project/activation/country channel breakout of some sort.


But if things get too fine grained you lose some of the benefit of a 
group exchange.


Most of the questions I see (and have) are not specific to a project or 
task, but just to being a new mapper in general, which anyone could 
probably answer.


Now I have visions of a josm irc plugin so the irc channel could just be 
a panel on the left.





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

Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[Pierre Béland]

I agree with Blake. An irc per job would be too much. We could first try to use 
the #hot irc.

There were suggestions yesterday by Allen to add some documentation on the Task 
Manager. A Help Pannel could do this job. In this pannel, it would describe the 
various info available with links

- LearnOsm
- Mapping in the context of african country (a page with various examples + 
images)
- Wiki page for the project if any (a wiki page field to be added in the edit 
page of the job) 
   For me a project is an activation like Ebola with many TM jobs

- Highway Tag Africa

- HOT discussion list
- #hot irc
- List of validation comments for this user
- etc

 
Pierre 




 De : Blake Girardot 
À : HOT  
Envoyé le : Dimanche 31 août 2014 22h26
Objet : Re: [HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers
 



On 8/31/2014 10:09 PM, maning sambale wrote:
> There was a discussion several months ago proposing irc like client for
> each job.  I think embedding synchronous communication for each job is a
> good approach to providing real-time feedback to those working on a
> specific project/job.
>
> For some prior art, check out MapCraft [0].  Related tickets [1 and 2]
>
> [0] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/MapCraft
> [1] https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager/issues/148
> [2] https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager/issues/40
>

I think irc type channel per job might be to few people to help. The 
traffic in the current #hot irc channel is very sparse as it is.

If we could get new people and experienced people together now in the 
current hot irc channel that would be good progress, if for some reason 
it turned out to be over crowded we could look at a per 
project/activation/country channel breakout of some sort.

But if things get too fine grained you lose some of the benefit of a 
group exchange.

Most of the questions I see (and have) are not specific to a project or 
task, but just to being a new mapper in general, which anyone could 
probably answer.

Now I have visions of a josm irc plugin so the irc channel could just be 
a panel on the left.







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