Re: [HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[Russell Deffner]

Ok, also on the ‘front-page’ of the Tasking Manager where you see the ‘brief’ 
of the project, you can find out who the specific Project Manager/creator is 
and maybe get clarification or ask them to specify in the instructions.

=Russ

 

From: john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 1:35 PM
To: Russell Deffner
Cc: Daniel Specht; hot@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

 

I think the classic that Daniel identified is map all roads.  Does it mean 
highway=unclassified and above, everything including tracks?  Adding tracks in 
can double the amount of effort.

Perhaps if we had some sort of validation of the project instructions before 
the tile is released?

I think best practises covers it nicely.  Perhaps in the training mention that 
projects with simple clear instructions have a better completion rate than more 
muzzy ones?

Cheerio John

 

On 16 February 2016 at 13:11, Russell Deffner <russell.deff...@hotosm.org> 
wrote:

Hi John,

 

It feels a bit odd to try and reply ‘on behalf of the AWG’ to…

So HOT activation group can you first inspect the instructions and then confirm 
with the project managers to see if we can reduce the possibility of different 
interpretations?  ie keep them as simple as possible.

But I think what you’re trying to address is a bit of a training/communication 
thing; each Project is created by an individual account that has 
permission/privilege on whatever instance of the Tasking Manager the project is 
created on. The main HOT instance for example has somewhere around 100 
people/accounts that can create projects there. In order to try and get ‘better 
instructions’ we have set-up a mailing list for everyone to communicate 
(tm-project-managers@) and ideally we’ll get some great training via courses@ 
and LearnOSM.  In other words, we really do need to create some ‘best 
practices’ for making the most efficient projects for the desired result, but 
some of that needs to be HOT/Disaster specific and some should be more broad to 
help those running other instances of the Tasking Manager – such as TeachOSM.

 

Anyway, great discussion – just trying to direct some action – it is on the 
Activation WG Trello to ‘further utilize’ the tm mailing list, training, etc.

 

=Russ

 

From: john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:19 AM
To: Daniel Specht
Cc: hot@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

 

So to clarify what you're saying is the project instructions should be much 
more precise.  The project managers should ask for precisely what is needed 
rather than we'd like everything since when we are imprecise different mappers 
and validators interpret the instructions differently.  Also asking for 
everything takes away resources from other projects.

So HOT activation group can you first inspect the instructions and then confirm 
with the project managers to see if we can reduce the possibility of different 
interpretations?  ie keep them as simple as possible.

Would it be an idea to go over the "abandoned" projects iethose that have been 
around for more than a year and see if by reducing the requested instructions 
we can at least get the highways and the major landuse=residential areas in?

Cheerio John

 

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

Re: [HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[john whelan]

I think the classic that Daniel identified is map all roads.  Does it mean
highway=unclassified and above, everything including tracks?  Adding tracks
in can double the amount of effort.

Perhaps if we had some sort of validation of the project instructions
before the tile is released?

I think best practises covers it nicely.  Perhaps in the training mention
that projects with simple clear instructions have a better completion rate
than more muzzy ones?

Cheerio John

On 16 February 2016 at 13:11, Russell Deffner <russell.deff...@hotosm.org>
wrote:

> Hi John,
>
>
>
> It feels a bit odd to try and reply ‘on behalf of the AWG’ to…
>
> So HOT activation group can you first inspect the instructions and then
> confirm with the project managers to see if we can reduce the possibility
> of different interpretations?  ie keep them as simple as possible.
>
> But I think what you’re trying to address is a bit of a
> training/communication thing; each Project is created by an individual
> account that has permission/privilege on whatever instance of the Tasking
> Manager the project is created on. The main HOT instance for example has
> somewhere around 100 people/accounts that can create projects there. In
> order to try and get ‘better instructions’ we have set-up a mailing list
> for everyone to communicate (tm-project-managers@) and ideally we’ll get
> some great training via courses@ and LearnOSM.  In other words, we really
> do need to create some ‘best practices’ for making the most efficient
> projects for the desired result, but some of that needs to be HOT/Disaster
> specific and some should be more broad to help those running other
> instances of the Tasking Manager – such as TeachOSM.
>
>
>
> Anyway, great discussion – just trying to direct some action – it is on
> the Activation WG Trello to ‘further utilize’ the tm mailing list,
> training, etc.
>
>
>
> =Russ
>
>
>
> *From:* john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:19 AM
> *To:* Daniel Specht
> *Cc:* hot@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation
> process
>
>
>
> So to clarify what you're saying is the project instructions should be
> much more precise.  The project managers should ask for precisely what is
> needed rather than we'd like everything since when we are imprecise
> different mappers and validators interpret the instructions differently.
> Also asking for everything takes away resources from other projects.
>
> So HOT activation group can you first inspect the instructions and then
> confirm with the project managers to see if we can reduce the possibility
> of different interpretations?  ie keep them as simple as possible.
>
> Would it be an idea to go over the "abandoned" projects iethose that have
> been around for more than a year and see if by reducing the requested
> instructions we can at least get the highways and the major
> landuse=residential areas in?
>
> Cheerio John
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[Russell Deffner]

Hi John,

 

It feels a bit odd to try and reply ‘on behalf of the AWG’ to…

So HOT activation group can you first inspect the instructions and then confirm 
with the project managers to see if we can reduce the possibility of different 
interpretations?  ie keep them as simple as possible.

But I think what you’re trying to address is a bit of a training/communication 
thing; each Project is created by an individual account that has 
permission/privilege on whatever instance of the Tasking Manager the project is 
created on. The main HOT instance for example has somewhere around 100 
people/accounts that can create projects there. In order to try and get ‘better 
instructions’ we have set-up a mailing list for everyone to communicate 
(tm-project-managers@) and ideally we’ll get some great training via courses@ 
and LearnOSM.  In other words, we really do need to create some ‘best 
practices’ for making the most efficient projects for the desired result, but 
some of that needs to be HOT/Disaster specific and some should be more broad to 
help those running other instances of the Tasking Manager – such as TeachOSM.

 

Anyway, great discussion – just trying to direct some action – it is on the 
Activation WG Trello to ‘further utilize’ the tm mailing list, training, etc.

 

=Russ

 

From: john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:19 AM
To: Daniel Specht
Cc: hot@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

 

So to clarify what you're saying is the project instructions should be much 
more precise.  The project managers should ask for precisely what is needed 
rather than we'd like everything since when we are imprecise different mappers 
and validators interpret the instructions differently.  Also asking for 
everything takes away resources from other projects.

So HOT activation group can you first inspect the instructions and then confirm 
with the project managers to see if we can reduce the possibility of different 
interpretations?  ie keep them as simple as possible.

Would it be an idea to go over the "abandoned" projects iethose that have been 
around for more than a year and see if by reducing the requested instructions 
we can at least get the highways and the major landuse=residential areas in?

Cheerio John

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

Re: [HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[john whelan]

So to clarify what you're saying is the project instructions should be much
more precise.  The project managers should ask for precisely what is needed
rather than we'd like everything since when we are imprecise different
mappers and validators interpret the instructions differently.  Also asking
for everything takes away resources from other projects.

So HOT activation group can you first inspect the instructions and then
confirm with the project managers to see if we can reduce the possibility
of different interpretations?  ie keep them as simple as possible.

Would it be an idea to go over the "abandoned" projects iethose that have
been around for more than a year and see if by reducing the requested
instructions we can at least get the highways and the major
landuse=residential areas in?

Cheerio John



On 12 February 2016 at 11:01, Daniel Specht  wrote:

> > On 11 Feb 2016 15:49, "john whelan"  > > wrote:
> >
> > In there somewhere in a wiki or some such where we can document
> > validation, what works and why and what to look for?  Perhaps put down
> > some sort of service level agreement ie after validation we are only
> > looking for what is requested in the instructions and for a JOSM
> > validotian to be run.  We expect 97% of settlements to be mapped type
> > thing? That way people who wish to validate have something to feel
> > confident about.
> >
> > We need to get more people into validation.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Cheerio John
>
> John's right -- we need more people validating, and we can accomplish that
> by explaining how to validate in the instructions, just as we explain how
> to map in the instructions. The instructions should have two parts  --
>  what the customer wants, and what the customer needs. Currently the
> instructions only describe what the customer wants. What the customer
> needs, the (generally unstated) validation requirements, are at least as
> important as the instructions themselves, and they won't be the same for
> all projects any more than the instructions will.
>
> --
> 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] How newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[john whelan]

I think the information belongs in
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data the
other one is too structured to touch.  I'll add some technical details in
but perhaps you could have some one look over the changes.  I don't think
I've changed the flow too much and I've omitted the idea of validating on a
new project.

Thanks John

On 11 February 2016 at 14:31, Nick Allen <nick.allen...@gmail.com> wrote:

> John,
>
> I think we could do with more information on LearnOSM - the current
> content is <http://learnosm.org/en/coordination/review/>
> http://learnosm.org/en/coordination/review/ & a couple of mentions in the
> Tasking Manager section.
>
> I'm sure there is more information in other sources as well as the wiki
> link
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data
>
> If you and a couple of other people could put a guide together & run it by
> a few people (Training Working Group?), I'd be happy to take the resulting
> document & format the text to place it on LearnOSM. Grab a few screenshots
> as well - I'll do the formatting, but I don't have time to actually write
> the text at the moment - I can cope with copy & paste & then format the
> outcome.
>
> Regards
>
> Nick
>
>
> On 11/02/16 18:29, Russell Deffner wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Validation is a ‘beast’ of a discussion that in my opinion has been
> addressed in two parts: teaching/training validators and technical changes
> in the Tasking Manager.  I for one completely support building a
> ‘white-list’ option (or otherwise the option to ‘appoint’ validators) into
> the TM; however don’t want to ‘spam’ the list too much, so I think this is
> the ‘most current’ and on-point issue in github:
> <https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/599>
> https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/599
>
>
>
> However, on the training side of things; we have built a ‘higher-level’
> type of course for validation here: <http://courses.hotosm.org/>
> http://courses.hotosm.org/ but it is specific to HOT Disaster Mapping;
> there has been talk about a module for ‘general’ validation on LearnOSM,
> and Nick or someone closer involved with the Training Working Group can
> probably tell you more about that.
>
>
>
> In either case, I think there is plenty of room for improvement.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> =Russ
>
>
>
> *From:* Nick Allen [mailto:nick.allen...@gmail.com
> <nick.allen...@gmail.com>]
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 11, 2016 9:19 AM
> *To:* john whelan
> *Cc:* HOT@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [HOT] How newer mappers can help a lot with the validation
> process
>
>
>
> There is a wiki article at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data
>
> It needs updating.
>
> Nick (OSM=Tallguy)
> my phone is responsible for any spelling mistakes!
>
> On 11 Feb 2016 15:49, "john whelan" < <jwhelan0...@gmail.com>
> jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In there somewhere in a wiki or some such where we can document
> validation, what works and why and what to look for?  Perhaps put down some
> sort of service level agreement ie after validation we are only looking for
> what is requested in the instructions and for a JOSM validotian to be run.
> We expect 97% of settlements to be mapped type thing? That way people who
> wish to validate have something to feel confident about.
>
> We need to get more people into validation.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Cheerio John
>
>
>
> On 11 February 2016 at 09:56, Jo < <winfi...@gmail.com>winfi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> If such a volunteer becomes more confident after a while, they shouldn't
> hesitate to actually validate the task, if all was mapped well and they
> didn't have to add/change much.
>
> When I look at finished tiles, I start with the intention to validate it.
> If I have to do too much work on it, I will sometimes simply unlock once
> again, either leaving a note it's actually complete now.
> If there is still more work than I have time for at that time, it's better
> to "invalidate", so another mapper knows where more work is needed.
>
> Polyglot
>
>
>
> 2016-02-11 14:47 GMT+01:00 Blake Girardot <bgirar...@gmail.com>:
>
>
> That is a good point John, if anyone does a second look to map in missing
> buildings in a "completed" task square you should leave a comment on the
> task square that says you looked over the completed task square and filled
> in all the missing buildings you could find.
>
> For sure it is not a waste of time to review completed task sq

[HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[Daniel Specht]

> On 11 Feb 2016 15:49, "john whelan"  > wrote:
>
> In there somewhere in a wiki or some such where we can document
> validation, what works and why and what to look for?  Perhaps put down
> some sort of service level agreement ie after validation we are only
> looking for what is requested in the instructions and for a JOSM
> validotian to be run.  We expect 97% of settlements to be mapped type
> thing? That way people who wish to validate have something to feel
> confident about.
>
> We need to get more people into validation.
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheerio John

John's right -- we need more people validating, and we can accomplish that
by explaining how to validate in the instructions, just as we explain how
to map in the instructions. The instructions should have two parts  --
 what the customer wants, and what the customer needs. Currently the
instructions only describe what the customer wants. What the customer
needs, the (generally unstated) validation requirements, are at least as
important as the instructions themselves, and they won't be the same for
all projects any more than the instructions will.

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

Re: [HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[john whelan]

I can't think of a case where a validator would need any special
instructions for a project that aren't the same as supplied to a mapper.

I feel there is a requirement for guidelines for validators but these are
more general, and I've sent you a copy as a separate email since they
haven't been translated into polically correct jargon so I don't feel they
are appropiate for the general list.

Thare are a number of ways that validation is looked upon.  The project
manager's view through the training courses has a different emphasis than
the way I look at it which is more from the data quality side.  Catching
and preventing errors by new mappers rather than fixing work that was done
a year ago.

Cheerio John

On 12 February 2016 at 11:01, Daniel Specht  wrote:

> > On 11 Feb 2016 15:49, "john whelan"  > > wrote:
> >
> > In there somewhere in a wiki or some such where we can document
> > validation, what works and why and what to look for?  Perhaps put down
> > some sort of service level agreement ie after validation we are only
> > looking for what is requested in the instructions and for a JOSM
> > validotian to be run.  We expect 97% of settlements to be mapped type
> > thing? That way people who wish to validate have something to feel
> > confident about.
> >
> > We need to get more people into validation.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Cheerio John
>
> John's right -- we need more people validating, and we can accomplish that
> by explaining how to validate in the instructions, just as we explain how
> to map in the instructions. The instructions should have two parts  --
>  what the customer wants, and what the customer needs. Currently the
> instructions only describe what the customer wants. What the customer
> needs, the (generally unstated) validation requirements, are at least as
> important as the instructions themselves, and they won't be the same for
> all projects any more than the instructions will.
>
> --
> 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] How newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[Jo]

If such a volunteer becomes more confident after a while, they shouldn't
hesitate to actually validate the task, if all was mapped well and they
didn't have to add/change much.

When I look at finished tiles, I start with the intention to validate it.
If I have to do too much work on it, I will sometimes simply unlock once
again, either leaving a note it's actually complete now.
If there is still more work than I have time for at that time, it's better
to "invalidate", so another mapper knows where more work is needed.

Polyglot

2016-02-11 14:47 GMT+01:00 Blake Girardot :

>
> That is a good point John, if anyone does a second look to map in missing
> buildings in a "completed" task square you should leave a comment on the
> task square that says you looked over the completed task square and filled
> in all the missing buildings you could find.
>
> For sure it is not a waste of time to review completed task squares, but I
> agree, it probably only needs one going over before validation.
>
> In addition, this is a very helpful way for new mappers to become better
> mappers and contribute to an urgent priority project to get done well and
> fast.
>
> Tiny task squares help, but stuff still gets missed and often we don't get
> the validation stage completed in time, no matter how important it is so an
> informal review makes a big difference if that is what a volunteer wants to
> do and can contribute.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Blake
>
>
>
> On 2/11/2016 2:33 PM, john whelan wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure this is the best use of our very limited number of
>> mappers.  Just scanning a tile takes time, so the optimum use of mapper
>> time is to have them scan once when they map and have a validator scan
>> once.
>>
>> For a productivity point of view its better to have new mappers split
>> the tiles twice and map a tiny tile completely than have twenty of them
>> go over the same area.  From the same point of view its better to have
>> them map where we have good imagery than map where quote "You may have
>> to squint a bit".  Mapping whilst squinting takes more time to map the
>> same area than mapping where the imagery is good.  No matter where they
>> map it will be useful to someone if not a short term MSF or American Red
>> Cross project and to be honest if something like Ebola crops up having
>> fairly good mapping of existing highways and villages in place before
>> you start helps those projects in the field at least plan out what and
>> where.
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 10 February 2016 at 10:28, Blake Girardot > > wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I just want to mention, that new mappers can really help with the
>> validation process by doing what they typically do: Map in roads and
>> buildings but into "Completed" task squares.
>>
>> You do not need to mark a task square "Validated", but just
>> reviewing the completed squares and filling in missing things or
>> fixing up buildings that might not be mapped very well (squaring up
>> the rectangular buildings :) is immensely helpful.
>>
>> I wrote a short OSM Diary entry that says basically the same thing:
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bgirardot/diary/36235
>>
>> I just thought I would mention it because if you see projects on the
>> Tasking Manager that look "done" just know you can always help a bit
>> more by reviewing "Completed" task squares just to double check
>> nothing was missed even if you do not feel experienced enough to
>> "Validate" a task square.
>>
>> This is especially true for projects where we have made a call for
>> more mappers on the email list or via twitter. Double and triple
>> checks to make sure the mapping in the instructions is actually
>> complete really helps in the process and gets the people on the
>> ground the best data we can possible generate for them.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Blake
>>
>> ___
>> 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] How newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[Nick Allen]

John,

I think we could do with more information on LearnOSM - the current 
content is http://learnosm.org/en/coordination/review/ & a couple of 
mentions in the Tasking Manager section.


I'm sure there is more information in other sources as well as the wiki 
link http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data


If you and a couple of other people could put a guide together & run it 
by a few people (Training Working Group?), I'd be happy to take the 
resulting document & format the text to place it on LearnOSM. Grab a few 
screenshots as well - I'll do the formatting, but I don't have time to 
actually write the text at the moment - I can cope with copy & paste & 
then format the outcome.


Regards

Nick

On 11/02/16 18:29, Russell Deffner wrote:


Hi all,

Validation is a ‘beast’ of a discussion that in my opinion has been 
addressed in two parts: teaching/training validators and technical 
changes in the Tasking Manager.  I for one completely support building 
a ‘white-list’ option (or otherwise the option to ‘appoint’ 
validators) into the TM; however don’t want to ‘spam’ the list too 
much, so I think this is the ‘most current’ and on-point issue in 
github: https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/599


However, on the training side of things; we have built a 
‘higher-level’ type of course for validation here: 
http://courses.hotosm.org/ but it is specific to HOT Disaster Mapping; 
there has been talk about a module for ‘general’ validation on 
LearnOSM, and Nick or someone closer involved with the Training 
Working Group can probably tell you more about that.


In either case, I think there is plenty of room for improvement.

Cheers,

=Russ

*From:*Nick Allen [mailto:nick.allen...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Thursday, February 11, 2016 9:19 AM
*To:* john whelan
*Cc:* HOT@openstreetmap.org
*Subject:* Re: [HOT] How newer mappers can help a lot with the 
validation process


There is a wiki article at 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data


It needs updating.

Nick (OSM=Tallguy)
my phone is responsible for any spelling mistakes!

On 11 Feb 2016 15:49, "john whelan" <jwhelan0...@gmail.com 
<mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com>> wrote:


In there somewhere in a wiki or some such where we can document 
validation, what works and why and what to look for?  Perhaps put down 
some sort of service level agreement ie after validation we are only 
looking for what is requested in the instructions and for a JOSM 
validotian to be run.  We expect 97% of settlements to be mapped type 
thing? That way people who wish to validate have something to feel 
confident about.


We need to get more people into validation.

Thanks

Cheerio John

On 11 February 2016 at 09:56, Jo <winfi...@gmail.com 
<mailto:winfi...@gmail.com>> wrote:


If such a volunteer becomes more confident after a while, they 
shouldn't hesitate to actually validate the task, if all was mapped 
well and they didn't have to add/change much.


When I look at finished tiles, I start with the intention to validate 
it. If I have to do too much work on it, I will sometimes simply 
unlock once again, either leaving a note it's actually complete now.
If there is still more work than I have time for at that time, it's 
better to "invalidate", so another mapper knows where more work is needed.


Polyglot

2016-02-11 14:47 GMT+01:00 Blake Girardot <bgirar...@gmail.com 
<mailto:bgirar...@gmail.com>>:



That is a good point John, if anyone does a second look to map in
missing buildings in a "completed" task square you should leave a
comment on the task square that says you looked over the completed
task square and filled in all the missing buildings you could find.

For sure it is not a waste of time to review completed task
squares, but I agree, it probably only needs one going over before
validation.

In addition, this is a very helpful way for new mappers to become
better mappers and contribute to an urgent priority project to get
done well and fast.

Tiny task squares help, but stuff still gets missed and often we
don't get the validation stage completed in time, no matter how
important it is so an informal review makes a big difference if
that is what a volunteer wants to do and can contribute.



Cheers,
Blake



On 2/11/2016 2:33 PM, john whelan wrote:

I'm not sure this is the best use of our very limited number of
mappers.  Just scanning a tile takes time, so the optimum use of
mapper
time is to have them scan once when they map and have a validator
scan once.

For a productivity point of view its better to have new mappers split
the tiles twice and map a tiny tile completely than have twenty of
them
go over the same area.  From the same point of view its better to have
them map where we have good imag

Re: [HOT] How newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[Blake Girardot]

That is a good point John, if anyone does a second look to map in 
missing buildings in a "completed" task square you should leave a 
comment on the task square that says you looked over the completed task 
square and filled in all the missing buildings you could find.


For sure it is not a waste of time to review completed task squares, but 
I agree, it probably only needs one going over before validation.


In addition, this is a very helpful way for new mappers to become better 
mappers and contribute to an urgent priority project to get done well 
and fast.


Tiny task squares help, but stuff still gets missed and often we don't 
get the validation stage completed in time, no matter how important it 
is so an informal review makes a big difference if that is what a 
volunteer wants to do and can contribute.




Cheers,
Blake



On 2/11/2016 2:33 PM, john whelan wrote:

I'm not sure this is the best use of our very limited number of
mappers.  Just scanning a tile takes time, so the optimum use of mapper
time is to have them scan once when they map and have a validator scan once.

For a productivity point of view its better to have new mappers split
the tiles twice and map a tiny tile completely than have twenty of them
go over the same area.  From the same point of view its better to have
them map where we have good imagery than map where quote "You may have
to squint a bit".  Mapping whilst squinting takes more time to map the
same area than mapping where the imagery is good.  No matter where they
map it will be useful to someone if not a short term MSF or American Red
Cross project and to be honest if something like Ebola crops up having
fairly good mapping of existing highways and villages in place before
you start helps those projects in the field at least plan out what and
where.

Cheerio John

On 10 February 2016 at 10:28, Blake Girardot > wrote:

Hi all,

I just want to mention, that new mappers can really help with the
validation process by doing what they typically do: Map in roads and
buildings but into "Completed" task squares.

You do not need to mark a task square "Validated", but just
reviewing the completed squares and filling in missing things or
fixing up buildings that might not be mapped very well (squaring up
the rectangular buildings :) is immensely helpful.

I wrote a short OSM Diary entry that says basically the same thing:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bgirardot/diary/36235

I just thought I would mention it because if you see projects on the
Tasking Manager that look "done" just know you can always help a bit
more by reviewing "Completed" task squares just to double check
nothing was missed even if you do not feel experienced enough to
"Validate" a task square.

This is especially true for projects where we have made a call for
more mappers on the email list or via twitter. Double and triple
checks to make sure the mapping in the instructions is actually
complete really helps in the process and gets the people on the
ground the best data we can possible generate for them.

Cheers,
Blake

___
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] How newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[john whelan]

I'm not sure this is the best use of our very limited number of mappers.
Just scanning a tile takes time, so the optimum use of mapper time is to
have them scan once when they map and have a validator scan once.

For a productivity point of view its better to have new mappers split the
tiles twice and map a tiny tile completely than have twenty of them go over
the same area.  From the same point of view its better to have them map
where we have good imagery than map where quote "You may have to squint a
bit".  Mapping whilst squinting takes more time to map the same area than
mapping where the imagery is good.  No matter where they map it will be
useful to someone if not a short term MSF or American Red Cross project and
to be honest if something like Ebola crops up having fairly good mapping of
existing highways and villages in place before you start helps those
projects in the field at least plan out what and where.

Cheerio John

On 10 February 2016 at 10:28, Blake Girardot  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I just want to mention, that new mappers can really help with the
> validation process by doing what they typically do: Map in roads and
> buildings but into "Completed" task squares.
>
> You do not need to mark a task square "Validated", but just reviewing the
> completed squares and filling in missing things or fixing up buildings that
> might not be mapped very well (squaring up the rectangular buildings :) is
> immensely helpful.
>
> I wrote a short OSM Diary entry that says basically the same thing:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bgirardot/diary/36235
>
> I just thought I would mention it because if you see projects on the
> Tasking Manager that look "done" just know you can always help a bit more
> by reviewing "Completed" task squares just to double check nothing was
> missed even if you do not feel experienced enough to "Validate" a task
> square.
>
> This is especially true for projects where we have made a call for more
> mappers on the email list or via twitter. Double and triple checks to make
> sure the mapping in the instructions is actually complete really helps in
> the process and gets the people on the ground the best data we can possible
> generate for them.
>
> Cheers,
> Blake
>
> ___
> 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] How newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[john whelan]

In there somewhere in a wiki or some such where we can document validation,
what works and why and what to look for?  Perhaps put down some sort of
service level agreement ie after validation we are only looking for what is
requested in the instructions and for a JOSM validotian to be run.  We
expect 97% of settlements to be mapped type thing? That way people who wish
to validate have something to feel confident about.

We need to get more people into validation.

Thanks

Cheerio John

On 11 February 2016 at 09:56, Jo  wrote:

> If such a volunteer becomes more confident after a while, they shouldn't
> hesitate to actually validate the task, if all was mapped well and they
> didn't have to add/change much.
>
> When I look at finished tiles, I start with the intention to validate it.
> If I have to do too much work on it, I will sometimes simply unlock once
> again, either leaving a note it's actually complete now.
> If there is still more work than I have time for at that time, it's better
> to "invalidate", so another mapper knows where more work is needed.
>
> Polyglot
>
> 2016-02-11 14:47 GMT+01:00 Blake Girardot :
>
>>
>> That is a good point John, if anyone does a second look to map in missing
>> buildings in a "completed" task square you should leave a comment on the
>> task square that says you looked over the completed task square and filled
>> in all the missing buildings you could find.
>>
>> For sure it is not a waste of time to review completed task squares, but
>> I agree, it probably only needs one going over before validation.
>>
>> In addition, this is a very helpful way for new mappers to become better
>> mappers and contribute to an urgent priority project to get done well and
>> fast.
>>
>> Tiny task squares help, but stuff still gets missed and often we don't
>> get the validation stage completed in time, no matter how important it is
>> so an informal review makes a big difference if that is what a volunteer
>> wants to do and can contribute.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Blake
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2/11/2016 2:33 PM, john whelan wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure this is the best use of our very limited number of
>>> mappers.  Just scanning a tile takes time, so the optimum use of mapper
>>> time is to have them scan once when they map and have a validator scan
>>> once.
>>>
>>> For a productivity point of view its better to have new mappers split
>>> the tiles twice and map a tiny tile completely than have twenty of them
>>> go over the same area.  From the same point of view its better to have
>>> them map where we have good imagery than map where quote "You may have
>>> to squint a bit".  Mapping whilst squinting takes more time to map the
>>> same area than mapping where the imagery is good.  No matter where they
>>> map it will be useful to someone if not a short term MSF or American Red
>>> Cross project and to be honest if something like Ebola crops up having
>>> fairly good mapping of existing highways and villages in place before
>>> you start helps those projects in the field at least plan out what and
>>> where.
>>>
>>> Cheerio John
>>>
>>> On 10 February 2016 at 10:28, Blake Girardot >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I just want to mention, that new mappers can really help with the
>>> validation process by doing what they typically do: Map in roads and
>>> buildings but into "Completed" task squares.
>>>
>>> You do not need to mark a task square "Validated", but just
>>> reviewing the completed squares and filling in missing things or
>>> fixing up buildings that might not be mapped very well (squaring up
>>> the rectangular buildings :) is immensely helpful.
>>>
>>> I wrote a short OSM Diary entry that says basically the same thing:
>>>
>>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bgirardot/diary/36235
>>>
>>> I just thought I would mention it because if you see projects on the
>>> Tasking Manager that look "done" just know you can always help a bit
>>> more by reviewing "Completed" task squares just to double check
>>> nothing was missed even if you do not feel experienced enough to
>>> "Validate" a task square.
>>>
>>> This is especially true for projects where we have made a call for
>>> more mappers on the email list or via twitter. Double and triple
>>> checks to make sure the mapping in the instructions is actually
>>> complete really helps in the process and gets the people on the
>>> ground the best data we can possible generate for them.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Blake
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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] How newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[Nick Allen]

There is a wiki article at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data

It needs updating.

Nick (OSM=Tallguy)
my phone is responsible for any spelling mistakes!
On 11 Feb 2016 15:49, "john whelan"  wrote:

> In there somewhere in a wiki or some such where we can document
> validation, what works and why and what to look for?  Perhaps put down some
> sort of service level agreement ie after validation we are only looking for
> what is requested in the instructions and for a JOSM validotian to be run.
> We expect 97% of settlements to be mapped type thing? That way people who
> wish to validate have something to feel confident about.
>
> We need to get more people into validation.
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 11 February 2016 at 09:56, Jo  wrote:
>
>> If such a volunteer becomes more confident after a while, they shouldn't
>> hesitate to actually validate the task, if all was mapped well and they
>> didn't have to add/change much.
>>
>> When I look at finished tiles, I start with the intention to validate it.
>> If I have to do too much work on it, I will sometimes simply unlock once
>> again, either leaving a note it's actually complete now.
>> If there is still more work than I have time for at that time, it's
>> better to "invalidate", so another mapper knows where more work is needed.
>>
>> Polyglot
>>
>> 2016-02-11 14:47 GMT+01:00 Blake Girardot :
>>
>>>
>>> That is a good point John, if anyone does a second look to map in
>>> missing buildings in a "completed" task square you should leave a comment
>>> on the task square that says you looked over the completed task square and
>>> filled in all the missing buildings you could find.
>>>
>>> For sure it is not a waste of time to review completed task squares, but
>>> I agree, it probably only needs one going over before validation.
>>>
>>> In addition, this is a very helpful way for new mappers to become better
>>> mappers and contribute to an urgent priority project to get done well and
>>> fast.
>>>
>>> Tiny task squares help, but stuff still gets missed and often we don't
>>> get the validation stage completed in time, no matter how important it is
>>> so an informal review makes a big difference if that is what a volunteer
>>> wants to do and can contribute.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Blake
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/11/2016 2:33 PM, john whelan wrote:
>>>
 I'm not sure this is the best use of our very limited number of
 mappers.  Just scanning a tile takes time, so the optimum use of mapper
 time is to have them scan once when they map and have a validator scan
 once.

 For a productivity point of view its better to have new mappers split
 the tiles twice and map a tiny tile completely than have twenty of them
 go over the same area.  From the same point of view its better to have
 them map where we have good imagery than map where quote "You may have
 to squint a bit".  Mapping whilst squinting takes more time to map the
 same area than mapping where the imagery is good.  No matter where they
 map it will be useful to someone if not a short term MSF or American Red
 Cross project and to be honest if something like Ebola crops up having
 fairly good mapping of existing highways and villages in place before
 you start helps those projects in the field at least plan out what and
 where.

 Cheerio John

 On 10 February 2016 at 10:28, Blake Girardot > wrote:

 Hi all,

 I just want to mention, that new mappers can really help with the
 validation process by doing what they typically do: Map in roads and
 buildings but into "Completed" task squares.

 You do not need to mark a task square "Validated", but just
 reviewing the completed squares and filling in missing things or
 fixing up buildings that might not be mapped very well (squaring up
 the rectangular buildings :) is immensely helpful.

 I wrote a short OSM Diary entry that says basically the same thing:

 http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bgirardot/diary/36235

 I just thought I would mention it because if you see projects on the
 Tasking Manager that look "done" just know you can always help a bit
 more by reviewing "Completed" task squares just to double check
 nothing was missed even if you do not feel experienced enough to
 "Validate" a task square.

 This is especially true for projects where we have made a call for
 more mappers on the email list or via twitter. Double and triple
 checks to make sure the mapping in the instructions is actually
 complete really helps in the process and gets the people on the
 ground the best data we can possible generate for them.

 

Re: [HOT] How newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[Russell Deffner]

Hi all,

 

Validation is a ‘beast’ of a discussion that in my opinion has been addressed 
in two parts: teaching/training validators and technical changes in the Tasking 
Manager.  I for one completely support building a ‘white-list’ option (or 
otherwise the option to ‘appoint’ validators) into the TM; however don’t want 
to ‘spam’ the list too much, so I think this is the ‘most current’ and on-point 
issue in github: https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/599 

 

However, on the training side of things; we have built a ‘higher-level’ type of 
course for validation here: http://courses.hotosm.org/ but it is specific to 
HOT Disaster Mapping; there has been talk about a module for ‘general’ 
validation on LearnOSM, and Nick or someone closer involved with the Training 
Working Group can probably tell you more about that.

 

In either case, I think there is plenty of room for improvement.

 

Cheers,

=Russ

 

From: Nick Allen [mailto:nick.allen...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2016 9:19 AM
To: john whelan
Cc: HOT@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [HOT] How newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

 

There is a wiki article at 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data

It needs updating. 

Nick (OSM=Tallguy)
my phone is responsible for any spelling mistakes!

On 11 Feb 2016 15:49, "john whelan" <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote:

In there somewhere in a wiki or some such where we can document validation, 
what works and why and what to look for?  Perhaps put down some sort of service 
level agreement ie after validation we are only looking for what is requested 
in the instructions and for a JOSM validotian to be run.  We expect 97% of 
settlements to be mapped type thing? That way people who wish to validate have 
something to feel confident about.

We need to get more people into validation.

Thanks

 

Cheerio John

 

On 11 February 2016 at 09:56, Jo <winfi...@gmail.com> wrote:

If such a volunteer becomes more confident after a while, they shouldn't 
hesitate to actually validate the task, if all was mapped well and they didn't 
have to add/change much.

When I look at finished tiles, I start with the intention to validate it. If I 
have to do too much work on it, I will sometimes simply unlock once again, 
either leaving a note it's actually complete now.
If there is still more work than I have time for at that time, it's better to 
"invalidate", so another mapper knows where more work is needed.

Polyglot

 

2016-02-11 14:47 GMT+01:00 Blake Girardot <bgirar...@gmail.com>:


That is a good point John, if anyone does a second look to map in missing 
buildings in a "completed" task square you should leave a comment on the task 
square that says you looked over the completed task square and filled in all 
the missing buildings you could find.

For sure it is not a waste of time to review completed task squares, but I 
agree, it probably only needs one going over before validation.

In addition, this is a very helpful way for new mappers to become better 
mappers and contribute to an urgent priority project to get done well and fast.

Tiny task squares help, but stuff still gets missed and often we don't get the 
validation stage completed in time, no matter how important it is so an 
informal review makes a big difference if that is what a volunteer wants to do 
and can contribute.



Cheers,
Blake



On 2/11/2016 2:33 PM, john whelan wrote:

I'm not sure this is the best use of our very limited number of
mappers.  Just scanning a tile takes time, so the optimum use of mapper
time is to have them scan once when they map and have a validator scan once.

For a productivity point of view its better to have new mappers split
the tiles twice and map a tiny tile completely than have twenty of them
go over the same area.  From the same point of view its better to have
them map where we have good imagery than map where quote "You may have
to squint a bit".  Mapping whilst squinting takes more time to map the
same area than mapping where the imagery is good.  No matter where they
map it will be useful to someone if not a short term MSF or American Red
Cross project and to be honest if something like Ebola crops up having
fairly good mapping of existing highways and villages in place before
you start helps those projects in the field at least plan out what and
where.

Cheerio John

On 10 February 2016 at 10:28, Blake Girardot <bgirar...@gmail.com

<mailto:bgirar...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi all,

I just want to mention, that new mappers can really help with the
validation process by doing what they typically do: Map in roads and
buildings but into "Completed" task squares.

You do not need to mark a task square "Validated", but just
reviewing the completed squares and filling in missing things or
fixing up buildings that might 

[HOT] How newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[Blake Girardot]

Hi all,

I just want to mention, that new mappers can really help with the 
validation process by doing what they typically do: Map in roads and 
buildings but into "Completed" task squares.


You do not need to mark a task square "Validated", but just reviewing 
the completed squares and filling in missing things or fixing up 
buildings that might not be mapped very well (squaring up the 
rectangular buildings :) is immensely helpful.


I wrote a short OSM Diary entry that says basically the same thing:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/bgirardot/diary/36235

I just thought I would mention it because if you see projects on the 
Tasking Manager that look "done" just know you can always help a bit 
more by reviewing "Completed" task squares just to double check nothing 
was missed even if you do not feel experienced enough to "Validate" a 
task square.


This is especially true for projects where we have made a call for more 
mappers on the email list or via twitter. Double and triple checks to 
make sure the mapping in the instructions is actually complete really 
helps in the process and gets the people on the ground the best data we 
can possible generate for them.


Cheers,
Blake

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