Re: [HOT] Validation gossip

[maning sambale]

Hi John,

Happy to know someone is taking care of fixing Africa highways.  FWIW,
we use osmlint [0] to detect common geometry errors, these detected
errors are then fed into to-fix [1].  Some of the detectors are
related to highways [2].

Happy to support people or teams in Africa if this is worthwhile to do.

[0] https://github.com/osmlab/osmlint
[1] https://osmlab.github.io/to-fix
[2] https://github.com/osmlab/osmlint/blob/master/validators.md


On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 5:55 AM, john whelan  wrote:
> It's not validation in the conventional sense but there seems to be some
> sort of system that detects crossing highways I suspect by using overpass.
> It was developed in Europe for crossing highways there but has now been
> extended to cover other places and I'm not sure of the name of it.
>
> Anyway rat_run I hope I have the user name right, has been hard at work
> fixing highways in Africa.  I don't think they are a HOT mapper they just
> clean up the map.  I certainly seem to often find they have fixed the map a
> few hours before I get there using the daily dump loaded into JOSM.
>
> So if you are hoping to use OpenStreetMap for routing in Africa it looks as
> if things are improving.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> ___
> 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] Validation support for mapathons

[Janet Chapman]

If there are any validators able to help out with this mapathon for Tanzania 
we'd be very grateful 
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/osm-triple-mapping-party-dar-es-salaam-london-vilnius-tickets-22109616458
ThanksJanet

 Janet Chapman - Campaigns Manager and Project Officer
http://hiaragirlpower.blogspot.com/
TANZANIA DEVELOPMENT TRUSTRegistered Charity no 270462Every pound given to TDT 
goes directly to projects in Tanzaniawww.TanzDevTrust.org 


> From: hot-requ...@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: HOT Digest, Vol 74, Issue 4
> To: hot@openstreetmap.org
> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 12:00:07 +
> 
> Send HOT mailing list submissions to
>   hot@openstreetmap.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   hot-requ...@openstreetmap.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>   hot-ow...@openstreetmap.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of HOT digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>1. Re: Request to those organising a maperthon. -, validation
>   support (Martin Noblecourt)
>2. Subject: Re: Request to those organising a maperthon. -
>   validation support (Andrew Patterson)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 09:59:14 +0200
> From: Martin Noblecourt 
> To: hot@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [HOT] Request to those organising a maperthon. -,
>   validation support
> Message-ID: <57021ed2.8020...@cartong.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I actually like your last idea Blake!
> I understand how it can be frustrating for validators like John to see loads 
> of new mappers do errors on some projects, we're trying to do our best in 
> capacity building when running mapathons but mistakes are always possible.
> The closest we can put the validator to the new mapper is the best in my 
> opinion: ideally in the same room (which is why we target to get validators 
> during mapathons), or else simultaneously (or almost) if the validators are 
> not there... so a way to identify the "main" validators for a task would 
> indeed be interesting. Maybe I'm putting the cart before the wheels but 
> having a way for people to "register" as validator to a project could be 
> interesting for the projects managers? (and then a button "send a message to 
> all validators" on which we can notify of upcoming mapathons :-) )
> 
> Finally, let's not forget that mapathons are not only a great way to bring 
> new contributors but also to create awareness on OSM amongst people that are 
> not familiar with it, including NGO workers and local communities, so it 
> ultimately servers the purpose of the HOT community of bringing data to the 
> people needing it :-)
> 
> Best regards.
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 17:33:10 +0200
> From: Blake Girardot
> To: Mike Thompson, john whelan
>   
> Cc:"hot@openstreetmap.org"  
> Subject: Re: [HOT] Request to those organising a maperthon. -
>   validation support
> Message-ID:<56fe94b6.2040...@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We do have an unused "validation" email group that was created with the
> idea that people who were available and interested in doing validations
> could share ideas, questions, tips, etc
> 
> And people who were running mapathons could easily notify people who
> liked to do validation that they were running a mapathon and could use
> some validation help during that time (not all mapathons need additional
> validators)
> 
> I am happy to dust it off and make it easy to join and send
> notifications too and make anyone who is interested a manager of the
> email group.
> 
> It does not quite address Mike's question as to how to know someone(s)
> are active and committed to validations on a particular project. But it
> could help with that if people who were doing validations for a project
> sent a notice to the group with an informative subject line like
> "Project 1234 has validators dedicated to it"
> 
> Another option for Mike's question is for people who are making an
> effort to validate a project contacted the project creator and put a
> note in a box at the bottom of the instructions or description that said
> something like "This project has active validators, please send a notice
> to the validators list if you would like a review of your mapping for an
> event or individually"
> 
> Anyway, kind of over complicated I know, but some ideas.
> 
> cheers
> blake
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2016 12:17:55 +0100
> From: Andrew Patterson 
> To: Blake Girardot 
> Cc: OSM HOT 
> Subject: [HOT] Subject: Re: Request to those organising a maperthon. -
>   validation support
> Message-ID:
>   
> C

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Steve Bower]

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

~~Steve

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


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

> I like Daniel's "Start Mapping" and "Stop Mapping".  The discussion seems
> to be evolving in the right direction as far as the text is concerned - but
> may I also mention the layout.  The few times I have hit the "Mark Task is
> Done" button, I have been in a hurry and had been aiming for the "Unlock"
> button immediately to its left.  Is there a need for two unlock buttons
> however they are labelled? - the higher button is well placed and has
> nothing close to it to add to my confusion !
>
> Andrew
>
> --
> Andrew Patterson
>
> The information contained in this e-mail and any
> files transmitted with it is confidential and intended for the addressee
> only.
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Jarmo Kivekäs]

I've just submitted a pull request on github[1] for the reworded buttons.

The labels proposed in the pull request are "Start mapping", "Stop
mapping", and "Submit for review" since the consensus seemed to settle
on those options.

[1]: https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/pull/678

-- Jarmo

On 30.08.2015 20:02, Dale Kunce wrote:
> I like the start mapping/stop mapping names. I always thought unlock was a
> bit weird.
> 
> @susan since the TM is a project in github feel free to file an issue on
> the repo and take a shot at fixing the labels in the code.
> 
> https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2
> 
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Jarmo Kivekäs 
> wrote:
> 

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

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Dale Kunce]

I like the start mapping/stop mapping names. I always thought unlock was a
bit weird.

@susan since the TM is a project in github feel free to file an issue on
the repo and take a shot at fixing the labels in the code.

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

On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Jarmo Kivekäs 
wrote:

> John,
>
> The tooltips do not require java, but do require javascript. This should
> not be an issue, though, since the tasking manager UI won't work in the
> first place if the browser is not executing javascript.
>
> -- Jarmo
>
> On 30.08.2015 19:04, john whelan wrote:
> > Do tool tips require java or javascript?  Not everyone is comfortable
> with
> > these from a security point of view.
> >
> > Cheerio John
> >
> > On 30 August 2015 at 11:43, Jarmo Kivekäs 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Currently there are tooltips in place that are displayed when you hover
> >> the cursor over the button. They give a pretty clear idea on what the
> >> buttons do:
> >>
> >> - "Lock this task to tell other that you are currently working on it"
> >> - "Stop working on this task and unlock it. You may resume work on it
> >> again later."
> >> - "Mark this task as done if you have completed all items in the
> >> instructions."
> >>
> >>
> >> I think we should settle for "Start mapping" and "Stop mapping" for the
> >> button labels.
> >>
> >> -- Jarmo
> >>
> >> On 30.08.2015 15:18, Martin Dittus wrote:
> >>> A further consideration: the terms should express a sense of _why_
> we’re
> >> asking people to press these buttons. The technical “check in/out”
> hints at
> >> this, although it is likely not universally understood, and might not
> >> easily translate.
> >>>
> >>> Do we explain our coordination workflow anywhere? If we have some
> >> confidence that people have seen that explanation before they are asked
> to
> >> “start”, then button labelling will become more straightforward. There’s
> >> less burden on the button to explain a fundamental workflow in 2-3
> words.
> >>>
> >>> It could be as simple as adding a sentence above the buttons.
> >>>
> >>> Although 2-3 words that label the button *and* explain the process at
> >> the same time would of course be the most elegant option :)
> >>>
> >>> m.
> >>>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> HOT mailing list
> >> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> >>
> >
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>



-- 
sent from my mobile device

Dale Kunce
http://normalhabit.com
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Jarmo Kivekäs]

John,

The tooltips do not require java, but do require javascript. This should
not be an issue, though, since the tasking manager UI won't work in the
first place if the browser is not executing javascript.

-- Jarmo

On 30.08.2015 19:04, john whelan wrote:
> Do tool tips require java or javascript?  Not everyone is comfortable with
> these from a security point of view.
> 
> Cheerio John
> 
> On 30 August 2015 at 11:43, Jarmo Kivekäs  wrote:
> 
>> Currently there are tooltips in place that are displayed when you hover
>> the cursor over the button. They give a pretty clear idea on what the
>> buttons do:
>>
>> - "Lock this task to tell other that you are currently working on it"
>> - "Stop working on this task and unlock it. You may resume work on it
>> again later."
>> - "Mark this task as done if you have completed all items in the
>> instructions."
>>
>>
>> I think we should settle for "Start mapping" and "Stop mapping" for the
>> button labels.
>>
>> -- Jarmo
>>
>> On 30.08.2015 15:18, Martin Dittus wrote:
>>> A further consideration: the terms should express a sense of _why_ we’re
>> asking people to press these buttons. The technical “check in/out” hints at
>> this, although it is likely not universally understood, and might not
>> easily translate.
>>>
>>> Do we explain our coordination workflow anywhere? If we have some
>> confidence that people have seen that explanation before they are asked to
>> “start”, then button labelling will become more straightforward. There’s
>> less burden on the button to explain a fundamental workflow in 2-3 words.
>>>
>>> It could be as simple as adding a sentence above the buttons.
>>>
>>> Although 2-3 words that label the button *and* explain the process at
>> the same time would of course be the most elegant option :)
>>>
>>> m.
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Validation

[john whelan]

Do tool tips require java or javascript?  Not everyone is comfortable with
these from a security point of view.

Cheerio John

On 30 August 2015 at 11:43, Jarmo Kivekäs  wrote:

> Currently there are tooltips in place that are displayed when you hover
> the cursor over the button. They give a pretty clear idea on what the
> buttons do:
>
> - "Lock this task to tell other that you are currently working on it"
> - "Stop working on this task and unlock it. You may resume work on it
> again later."
> - "Mark this task as done if you have completed all items in the
> instructions."
>
>
> I think we should settle for "Start mapping" and "Stop mapping" for the
> button labels.
>
> -- Jarmo
>
> On 30.08.2015 15:18, Martin Dittus wrote:
> > A further consideration: the terms should express a sense of _why_ we’re
> asking people to press these buttons. The technical “check in/out” hints at
> this, although it is likely not universally understood, and might not
> easily translate.
> >
> > Do we explain our coordination workflow anywhere? If we have some
> confidence that people have seen that explanation before they are asked to
> “start”, then button labelling will become more straightforward. There’s
> less burden on the button to explain a fundamental workflow in 2-3 words.
> >
> > It could be as simple as adding a sentence above the buttons.
> >
> > Although 2-3 words that label the button *and* explain the process at
> the same time would of course be the most elegant option :)
> >
> > m.
> >
>
> ___
> 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] Validation

[Jarmo Kivekäs]

Currently there are tooltips in place that are displayed when you hover
the cursor over the button. They give a pretty clear idea on what the
buttons do:

- "Lock this task to tell other that you are currently working on it"
- "Stop working on this task and unlock it. You may resume work on it
again later."
- "Mark this task as done if you have completed all items in the
instructions."


I think we should settle for "Start mapping" and "Stop mapping" for the
button labels.

-- Jarmo

On 30.08.2015 15:18, Martin Dittus wrote:
> A further consideration: the terms should express a sense of _why_ we’re 
> asking people to press these buttons. The technical “check in/out” hints at 
> this, although it is likely not universally understood, and might not easily 
> translate.
> 
> Do we explain our coordination workflow anywhere? If we have some confidence 
> that people have seen that explanation before they are asked to “start”, then 
> button labelling will become more straightforward. There’s less burden on the 
> button to explain a fundamental workflow in 2-3 words.
> 
> It could be as simple as adding a sentence above the buttons.
> 
> Although 2-3 words that label the button *and* explain the process at the 
> same time would of course be the most elegant option :)
> 
> m.
> 

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

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Suzan Reed]

'Start mapping' and 'end mapping' clearly communicates without the need for 
further explanation. The words can be stacked on the button for even more 
clarity. Good visual and written description that's clear and concise. How 
does this get implimated? What are the next steps?



Sent from my phone. Please forgive errors.



On August 30, 2015 5:21:12 AM Martin Dittus  wrote:

A further consideration: the terms should express a sense of _why_ we’re 
asking people to press these buttons. The technical “check in/out” hints at 
this, although it is likely not universally understood, and might not 
easily translate.


Do we explain our coordination workflow anywhere? If we have some 
confidence that people have seen that explanation before they are asked to 
“start”, then button labelling will become more straightforward. There’s 
less burden on the button to explain a fundamental workflow in 2-3 words.


It could be as simple as adding a sentence above the buttons.

Although 2-3 words that label the button *and* explain the process at the 
same time would of course be the most elegant option :)


m.



On 30 Aug 2015, at 12:06, Pierre GIRAUD  wrote:

Also please remember that the tool is translated in other languages.
On my side, I don't know how to translate "check in/out" in french. It
depends on the situation. When I'm at the airport checking in
luggages, or at a hotel checking in to get my room's keys, I won't use
the same words.

On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 2:52 AM, john whelan  wrote:

check in /out might be considered a regional dialect, you have to consider
the audience and their level of English, I think keep it as simple and as
clear as possible.

Cheerio John

On 29 August 2015 at 20:15, Denis Carriere  wrote:


I'm liking "check in" & "check out", I feel terminology is more commonly
used.

Also ethically the words "start work" doesn't look as good as button vs.
"check in".

My personal opinion, +1 on "check in" & "check out"

~~
Denis Carriere
GIS Project Manager
Twitter: @DenisCarriere
OSM: DenisCarriere
Email: carriere.de...@gmail.com

On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Suzan Reed  wrote:


Would 'start work' and 'stop work' be clear to all people?

Suzan
Sent from my phone. Please forgive errors.



On August 29, 2015 11:46:55 AM Jarmo Kivekäs 
wrote:


Hi!

There has been some related discussion in a github issue[1] about this
last October.

I rather like the "Stop working on task" alternative that is suggested
instead of the "Unlock" button in that issue. Especially since currently
the button to lock a task says "Start mapping". There is more obvious
connection between start/stop than start/unlock.

Checking in and checking out content is probably a strange concept to
many. I don't think it's an improvement over locking and unlocking.

"Submit for review" is a definitive improvement over "Mark as done". It
should be implemented.

I've played around a little and made the changes I like the best in a
local copy of the tasking manager (screenshot in attachment). I'll
implement the changes and make a pull request if we come to an
agreement.

-- jarmo

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

On 29.08.2015 05:22, Jim Smith wrote:


I like the idea of renaming the 'mark as done' button to 'submit for
review'. Little tweaks like that can bring clarity to those starting out.
Also Suzan suggested that the “lock” “unlock” function be renamed to “Check
out” and “check in". That would make a big difference as well.

I don't want to be too overenthusiastic  but is there any reason not to
make those two improvements? If no objection, can they be done soon?

Jim

-Original Message-
From: Martin Dittus [mailto:mar...@dekstop.de]
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 7:44 AM
To: David Toy 
Cc: hot 
Subject: Re: [HOT] Validation

As I’m going through the comments again (here and on my diary post) I’m
starting to realise how important it is to give feedback to newcomers.
Without it, few people will ever feel confident about their contributions.

In many cases it probably doesn’t even need to be feedback from an
expert — it could be a comment from someone with similar experience levels.
A second pair of eyes.

An important part of this is being able to ask someone for a second
opinion. At a mapathon that’s easy, but where do remote mappers go?

m.



On 24 Aug 2015, at 19:00, David Toy  wrote:

Hi Jarmo. Welcome!

My introduction/onboarding to HOT was almost identical to Jarmo's -
and I can relate very clearly to all the points he has raised. I suspect
that there are a few more lurkers on this list who will be similar.

Pierre G's document suggests renaming the 'mark as done' button to
'submit for review'

Re: [HOT] Validation

[john whelan]

>I like "start mapping" and "stop mapping". Direct and simple.

Sounds very good to me and should be simple to translate.

Cheerio John

On 30 August 2015 at 10:47, Daniel Specht  wrote:

> I like "start mapping" and "stop mapping". Direct and simple.
>
> --
> 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] Validation

[Martin Dittus]

A further consideration: the terms should express a sense of _why_ we’re asking 
people to press these buttons. The technical “check in/out” hints at this, 
although it is likely not universally understood, and might not easily 
translate.

Do we explain our coordination workflow anywhere? If we have some confidence 
that people have seen that explanation before they are asked to “start”, then 
button labelling will become more straightforward. There’s less burden on the 
button to explain a fundamental workflow in 2-3 words.

It could be as simple as adding a sentence above the buttons.

Although 2-3 words that label the button *and* explain the process at the same 
time would of course be the most elegant option :)

m.


> On 30 Aug 2015, at 12:06, Pierre GIRAUD  wrote:
> 
> Also please remember that the tool is translated in other languages.
> On my side, I don't know how to translate "check in/out" in french. It
> depends on the situation. When I'm at the airport checking in
> luggages, or at a hotel checking in to get my room's keys, I won't use
> the same words.
> 
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 2:52 AM, john whelan  wrote:
>> check in /out might be considered a regional dialect, you have to consider
>> the audience and their level of English, I think keep it as simple and as
>> clear as possible.
>> 
>> Cheerio John
>> 
>> On 29 August 2015 at 20:15, Denis Carriere  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I'm liking "check in" & "check out", I feel terminology is more commonly
>>> used.
>>> 
>>> Also ethically the words "start work" doesn't look as good as button vs.
>>> "check in".
>>> 
>>> My personal opinion, +1 on "check in" & "check out"
>>> 
>>> ~~
>>> Denis Carriere
>>> GIS Project Manager
>>> Twitter: @DenisCarriere
>>> OSM: DenisCarriere
>>> Email: carriere.de...@gmail.com
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Suzan Reed  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Would 'start work' and 'stop work' be clear to all people?
>>>> 
>>>> Suzan
>>>> Sent from my phone. Please forgive errors.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On August 29, 2015 11:46:55 AM Jarmo Kivekäs 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi!
>>>>> 
>>>>> There has been some related discussion in a github issue[1] about this
>>>>> last October.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I rather like the "Stop working on task" alternative that is suggested
>>>>> instead of the "Unlock" button in that issue. Especially since currently
>>>>> the button to lock a task says "Start mapping". There is more obvious
>>>>> connection between start/stop than start/unlock.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Checking in and checking out content is probably a strange concept to
>>>>> many. I don't think it's an improvement over locking and unlocking.
>>>>> 
>>>>> "Submit for review" is a definitive improvement over "Mark as done". It
>>>>> should be implemented.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I've played around a little and made the changes I like the best in a
>>>>> local copy of the tasking manager (screenshot in attachment). I'll
>>>>> implement the changes and make a pull request if we come to an
>>>>> agreement.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- jarmo
>>>>> 
>>>>> [1] https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/401
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 29.08.2015 05:22, Jim Smith wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I like the idea of renaming the 'mark as done' button to 'submit for
>>>>>> review'. Little tweaks like that can bring clarity to those starting out.
>>>>>> Also Suzan suggested that the “lock” “unlock” function be renamed to 
>>>>>> “Check
>>>>>> out” and “check in". That would make a big difference as well.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I don't want to be too overenthusiastic  but is there any reason not to
>>>>>> make those two improvements? If no objection, can they be done soon?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>>> From: Martin Dittus [mailto:mar...@dekstop.de]
>>&g

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Jim Smith]

Suzan, 

Your question, “How can we encourage newbies to take the time to go through 
some training?” struck a chord with me. I still remember being a newbie in 
mapping a short time ago :). And I still recall my goal was to get in as 
quickly as possible and save some people in Nepal. I didn’t care much for the 
history of OSM or HOT. I didn’t want to learn how grateful people would be for 
my mapping. In typical style, I’ll read the manual later… let me try it first 
:).

 

Your concept of chopping everything out but the essentials is perfect. I 
started reading the instructions. Then when it got  bogged down in how vital 
mapping is, I skipped ahead to how to map. When I got done with the iD section, 
I felt like I could map but then it kept pushing me to learn about JOSM, 
Potlash, Field Papers, etc.

 

Before bailing out, I decided, much against the feel I got from the 
instructions, I would just jump in and try mapping with iD instead of spending 
a few more days or weeks studying all the stuff I was supposed to.

 

Wow, it worked! I didn’t need to become well versed in everything. I could just 
open a window and start putting squared boxes around buildings! And apparently 
doing that was useful too! Eventually, I learned how to map rivers and 
highways. I kept hearing about how neat JOSM was so when I had a couple of 
days, I loaded that and started learning it.

 

I started getting nice notes from John Whelan and others with suggestions on 
how I could be even more useful. Wow, people actually noticed what us newbies 
do! 

 

So to answer Suzan’s question on how to encourage newbies? Keep things simple. 
Simple instructions on basic stuff like loading iD and marking and squaring 
buildings. Get someone to check their work and send occasional encouraging note 
with some feedback (“here’s how to square your buildings” or “don’t put 
buildings on top of roads”, etc). Once they have the confidence, ask if them 
step 2 with roads and rivers or something. Or they can stay with buildings and 
go to advanced stuff like making a round building, etc.

 

That’s how I recommend you encourage newbies. I know it works because I was 
there :).

 

Jim Smith

 

From: Suzan Reed [mailto:su...@suzanreed.com] 
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2015 4:30 AM
To: Robert Banick ; Martin Dittus 
Cc: David Toy ; hot 
Subject: Re: [HOT] Validation

 

Often a tile is worked on by a number of people. Perhaps "ready for review" 
accommodates having a number of contributers, and also has the connotation that 
it's finished?

Hopefully the new Learn OSM modules and possibly text with each task pointing 
newbies to those modules will enlighten them on what it all means before they 
contribute. 

How can we encourage newbies to take the time to go through some training? 

Sent from my phone. Please forgive errors.

On August 28, 2015 10:01:28 PM "Robert Banick" mailto:rban...@gmail.com> > wrote:

I really like both proposed wording changes - they send the right message to 
new contributors. My only concern is that "submit for review" implies that 
there *will* be review, which we can't always guarantee. 

 

The number of regular validators has gone way up in the last few years and 
that's been huge for HOT. But we still can't validate every tile. I worry that 
newcomers won't understand this and will get frustrated if their tile doesn't 
get reviewed. I'm sure some people really look forward to that green square 
saying they did it well.

 

Is there some way we can verbally message this in the TM? Maybe a popup modal 
the first time someone submits for review explaining these system?


—
Sent from Mailbox <https://www.dropbox.com/mailbox>  

 

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Martin Dittus mailto:mar...@dekstop.de> > wrote:

As I’m going through the comments again (here and on my diary post) I’m 
starting to realise how important it is to give feedback to newcomers. Without 
it, few people will ever feel confident about their contributions.

In many cases it probably doesn’t even need to be feedback from an expert — it 
could be a comment from someone with similar experience levels. A second pair 
of eyes.

An important part of this is being able to ask someone for a second opinion. At 
a mapathon that’s easy, but where do remote mappers go?

m.


> On 24 Aug 2015, at 19:00, David Toy  <mailto:d...@vidtoy.co.uk> > wrote:
> 
> Hi Jarmo. Welcome!
> 
> My introduction/onboarding to HOT was almost identical to Jarmo's - and I can 
> relate very clearly to all the points he has raised. I suspect that there are 
> a few more lurkers on this list who will be similar.
> 
> Pierre G's document suggests renaming the 'mark as done' button to 'submit 
> for review'.
> 
> A simplification of terms / altered workflow would have helped me initially. 
> Taking the example of

Re: [HOT] Validation

[john whelan]

Realistically to give the NGOs the service level they would like we need to
validate or review every tile.

We need to revisit our ideas that someone off the street will know enough
about OSM to be able to map correctly everything asked for in the
instructions and will understand our jargon of done, validated and feel
comfortable enough to mark the tile done should they complete a tile which
is rare, as Suzan has pointed out.

I think certain mappers are probably accurate enough that when they mark a
tile done a bot could mark it validated perhaps overnight.  That would
allow us to concentrate what validation resources we do have on the tiles
that are likely to have more need of revision.

Cheerio John



On 29 August 2015 at 00:59, Robert Banick  wrote:

> I really like both proposed wording changes - they send the right message
> to new contributors. My only concern is that "submit for review" implies
> that there *will* be review, which we can't always guarantee.
>
> The number of regular validators has gone way up in the last few years and
> that's been huge for HOT. But we still can't validate every tile. I worry
> that newcomers won't understand this and will get frustrated if their tile
> doesn't get reviewed. I'm sure some people really look forward to that
> green square saying they did it well.
>
> Is there some way we can verbally message this in the TM? Maybe a popup
> modal the first time someone submits for review explaining these system?
>
> —
> Sent from Mailbox 
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Martin Dittus  wrote:
>
>> As I’m going through the comments again (here and on my diary post) I’m
>> starting to realise how important it is to give feedback to newcomers.
>> Without it, few people will ever feel confident about their contributions.
>>
>> In many cases it probably doesn’t even need to be feedback from an expert
>> — it could be a comment from someone with similar experience levels. A
>> second pair of eyes.
>>
>> An important part of this is being able to ask someone for a second
>> opinion. At a mapathon that’s easy, but where do remote mappers go?
>>
>> m.
>>
>>
>> > On 24 Aug 2015, at 19:00, David Toy  wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Jarmo. Welcome!
>> >
>> > My introduction/onboarding to HOT was almost identical to Jarmo's - and
>> I can relate very clearly to all the points he has raised. I suspect that
>> there are a few more lurkers on this list who will be similar.
>> >
>> > Pierre G's document suggests renaming the 'mark as done' button to
>> 'submit for review'.
>> >
>> > A simplification of terms / altered workflow would have helped me
>> initially. Taking the example of the done button, 'submit for review'
>> implies that:
>> > - a) it's ok to make a mistake getting started - someone will catch it,
>> and
>> > - b) I should expect feedback
>> >
>> > This helps with Jarmo's first and second scenarios, but also softens
>> the blow when (your first) task is coldly invalidated with only four words
>> of explanation. (Validators: that's not a criticism - I understand the time
>> pressure.)
>> >
>> > Also, not all users will read the docs - while training resources are
>> useful, these little nudges of understanding help all users - even the new
>> ones who enthusiastically started but didn't read the instructions.
>> >
>> > David
>> >
>> > On 24 August 2015 at 17:18, Jarmo Kivekäs 
>> wrote:
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > I've been lurking on the mailing list for a while, but I'm still fairly
>> > new to HOT. I though I'd pitch in.
>> >
>> > I definitely recognized myself from Martin's write up as belonging to
>> > the set of contributors who commit changes but don't mark tiles as done.
>> > Below are some reasons why I've not marked tiles as complete in the
>> past.
>> >
>> > 1. I think part of the reason is that I started out mapping on my own (I
>> > haven't found a local community, nor was I introduced to mapping on a
>> > mapathon). Therefore I haven't been able to just quickly ask someone
>> > advice about something I'm unsure about. In these cases I've usually
>> > left a comment in the tasking manager about whatever I was unsure about,
>> > mapped the rest, but not marked the tile as done.
>> >
>> > Not marking the tile done is me being conservative, I guess. As a new
>> > mapper it is currently difficult to get feedback on the quality of your
>> > mapping, you pretty much needs to actively seek it out. Getting
>> > notifications when there are new comments on tiles you've worked on
>> > would be nice.
>> >
>> > 2. When parts of a region are already mapped (probably form before the
>> > activation was created) but the tiles that are already mapped are not
>> > marked as done. I'm reluctant to mark a grid as done without making any
>> > changes to it, even if it seemingly fills all the criterion for the
>> > task. Especially when the grid has been locked my multiple users in the
>> > past. "They didn't think it was as done, I'm probably missing
>> > som

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Suzan Reed]

Often a tile is worked on by a number of people. Perhaps "ready for review" 
accommodates having a number of contributers, and also has the connotation 
that it's finished?


Hopefully the new Learn OSM modules and possibly text with each task 
pointing newbies to those modules will enlighten them on what it all means 
before they contribute.


How can we encourage newbies to take the time to go through some training?


Sent from my phone. Please forgive errors.



On August 28, 2015 10:01:28 PM "Robert Banick"  wrote:

I really like both proposed wording changes - they send the right message 
to new contributors. My only concern is that "submit for review" implies 
that there *will* be review, which we can't always guarantee. 



The number of regular validators has gone way up in the last few years and 
that's been huge for HOT. But we still can't validate every tile. I worry 
that newcomers won't understand this and will get frustrated if their tile 
doesn't get reviewed. I'm sure some people really look forward to that 
green square saying they did it well.





Is there some way we can verbally message this in the TM? Maybe a popup 
modal the first time someone submits for review explaining these system?



—
Sent from Mailbox

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Martin Dittus  wrote:

As I’m going through the comments again (here and on my diary post) I’m 
starting to realise how important it is to give feedback to newcomers. 
Without it, few people will ever feel confident about their contributions.
In many cases it probably doesn’t even need to be feedback from an expert — 
it could be a comment from someone with similar experience levels. A second 
pair of eyes.
An important part of this is being able to ask someone for a second 
opinion. At a mapathon that’s easy, but where do remote mappers go?

m.

On 24 Aug 2015, at 19:00, David Toy  wrote:

Hi Jarmo. Welcome!

My introduction/onboarding to HOT was almost identical to Jarmo's - and I 
can relate very clearly to all the points he has raised. I suspect that 
there are a few more lurkers on this list who will be similar.


Pierre G's document suggests renaming the 'mark as done' button to 'submit 
for review'.


A simplification of terms / altered workflow would have helped me 
initially. Taking the example of the done button, 'submit for review' 
implies that:

- a) it's ok to make a mistake getting started - someone will catch it, and
- b) I should expect feedback

This helps with Jarmo's first and second scenarios, but also softens the 
blow when (your first) task is coldly invalidated with only four words of 
explanation. (Validators: that's not a criticism - I understand the time 
pressure.)


Also, not all users will read the docs - while training resources are 
useful, these little nudges of understanding help all users - even the new 
ones who enthusiastically started but didn't read the instructions.


David

On 24 August 2015 at 17:18, Jarmo Kivekäs  wrote:
Hi!

I've been lurking on the mailing list for a while, but I'm still fairly
new to HOT. I though I'd pitch in.

I definitely recognized myself from Martin's write up as belonging to
the set of contributors who commit changes but don't mark tiles as done.
Below are some reasons why I've not marked tiles as complete in the past.

1. I think part of the reason is that I started out mapping on my own (I
haven't found a local community, nor was I introduced to mapping on a
mapathon). Therefore I haven't been able to just quickly ask someone
advice about something I'm unsure about. In these cases I've usually
left a comment in the tasking manager about whatever I was unsure about,
mapped the rest, but not marked the tile as done.

Not marking the tile done is me being conservative, I guess. As a new
mapper it is currently difficult to get feedback on the quality of your
mapping, you pretty much needs to actively seek it out. Getting
notifications when there are new comments on tiles you've worked on
would be nice.

2. When parts of a region are already mapped (probably form before the
activation was created) but the tiles that are already mapped are not
marked as done. I'm reluctant to mark a grid as done without making any
changes to it, even if it seemingly fills all the criterion for the
task. Especially when the grid has been locked my multiple users in the
past. "They didn't think it was as done, I'm probably missing
something." I realize that this thinking only propagates the problem,
since I'll just be one more user on the list.

3. Grids can be pretty large. Sometimes you just don't manage to map it
completely in a short sitting. I know grids can be split, but...

4. Sometimes I'll for example only be mapping roads. Doing this will
result in many tiles being checked out and changesets are generated, but
no tiles are actually being finished.


-- Jarmo


On 24.08.2015 16:37, Martin Dittus wrote:
>
>> On 24 Aug 2015, at 11:22, john whelan  wrote:
>>
>> I'd also like to see a third opti

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Robert Banick]

I really like both proposed wording changes - they send the right message to 
new contributors. My only concern is that "submit for review" implies that 
there *will* be review, which we can't always guarantee. 


The number of regular validators has gone way up in the last few years and 
that's been huge for HOT. But we still can't validate every tile. I worry that 
newcomers won't understand this and will get frustrated if their tile doesn't 
get reviewed. I'm sure some people really look forward to that green square 
saying they did it well.




Is there some way we can verbally message this in the TM? Maybe a popup modal 
the first time someone submits for review explaining these system?


—
Sent from Mailbox

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Martin Dittus  wrote:

> As I’m going through the comments again (here and on my diary post) I’m 
> starting to realise how important it is to give feedback to newcomers. 
> Without it, few people will ever feel confident about their contributions.
> In many cases it probably doesn’t even need to be feedback from an expert — 
> it could be a comment from someone with similar experience levels. A second 
> pair of eyes.
> An important part of this is being able to ask someone for a second opinion. 
> At a mapathon that’s easy, but where do remote mappers go?
> m.
>> On 24 Aug 2015, at 19:00, David Toy  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Jarmo. Welcome!
>> 
>> My introduction/onboarding to HOT was almost identical to Jarmo's - and I 
>> can relate very clearly to all the points he has raised. I suspect that 
>> there are a few more lurkers on this list who will be similar.
>> 
>> Pierre G's document suggests renaming the 'mark as done' button to 'submit 
>> for review'.
>> 
>> A simplification of terms / altered workflow would have helped me initially. 
>> Taking the example of the done button, 'submit for review' implies that:
>> - a) it's ok to make a mistake getting started - someone will catch it, and
>> - b) I should expect feedback
>> 
>> This helps with Jarmo's first and second scenarios, but also softens the 
>> blow when (your first) task is coldly invalidated with only four words of 
>> explanation. (Validators: that's not a criticism - I understand the time 
>> pressure.)
>> 
>> Also, not all users will read the docs - while training resources are 
>> useful, these little nudges of understanding help all users - even the new 
>> ones who enthusiastically started but didn't read the instructions.
>> 
>> David
>> 
>> On 24 August 2015 at 17:18, Jarmo Kivekäs  wrote:
>> Hi!
>> 
>> I've been lurking on the mailing list for a while, but I'm still fairly
>> new to HOT. I though I'd pitch in.
>> 
>> I definitely recognized myself from Martin's write up as belonging to
>> the set of contributors who commit changes but don't mark tiles as done.
>> Below are some reasons why I've not marked tiles as complete in the past.
>> 
>> 1. I think part of the reason is that I started out mapping on my own (I
>> haven't found a local community, nor was I introduced to mapping on a
>> mapathon). Therefore I haven't been able to just quickly ask someone
>> advice about something I'm unsure about. In these cases I've usually
>> left a comment in the tasking manager about whatever I was unsure about,
>> mapped the rest, but not marked the tile as done.
>> 
>> Not marking the tile done is me being conservative, I guess. As a new
>> mapper it is currently difficult to get feedback on the quality of your
>> mapping, you pretty much needs to actively seek it out. Getting
>> notifications when there are new comments on tiles you've worked on
>> would be nice.
>> 
>> 2. When parts of a region are already mapped (probably form before the
>> activation was created) but the tiles that are already mapped are not
>> marked as done. I'm reluctant to mark a grid as done without making any
>> changes to it, even if it seemingly fills all the criterion for the
>> task. Especially when the grid has been locked my multiple users in the
>> past. "They didn't think it was as done, I'm probably missing
>> something." I realize that this thinking only propagates the problem,
>> since I'll just be one more user on the list.
>> 
>> 3. Grids can be pretty large. Sometimes you just don't manage to map it
>> completely in a short sitting. I know grids can be split, but...
>> 
>> 4. Sometimes I'll for example only be mapping roads. Doing this will
>> result in many tiles being checked out and changesets are generated, but
>> no tiles are actually being finished.
>> 
>> 
>> -- Jarmo
>> 
>> 
>> On 24.08.2015 16:37, Martin Dittus wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 24 Aug 2015, at 11:22, john whelan  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I'd also like to see a third option on the tasking manger "I've done some 
>> >> work but not completed the tile could someone review it please."  I'd 
>> >> rather catch errors early and some new mappers may not feel confident 
>> >> enough to mark a tile complete.
>> >
>> > Considering better workflows for “incomplete” subm

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Martin Dittus]

As I’m going through the comments again (here and on my diary post) I’m 
starting to realise how important it is to give feedback to newcomers. Without 
it, few people will ever feel confident about their contributions.

In many cases it probably doesn’t even need to be feedback from an expert — it 
could be a comment from someone with similar experience levels. A second pair 
of eyes.

An important part of this is being able to ask someone for a second opinion. At 
a mapathon that’s easy, but where do remote mappers go?

m.


> On 24 Aug 2015, at 19:00, David Toy  wrote:
> 
> Hi Jarmo. Welcome!
> 
> My introduction/onboarding to HOT was almost identical to Jarmo's - and I can 
> relate very clearly to all the points he has raised. I suspect that there are 
> a few more lurkers on this list who will be similar.
> 
> Pierre G's document suggests renaming the 'mark as done' button to 'submit 
> for review'.
> 
> A simplification of terms / altered workflow would have helped me initially. 
> Taking the example of the done button, 'submit for review' implies that:
> - a) it's ok to make a mistake getting started - someone will catch it, and
> - b) I should expect feedback
> 
> This helps with Jarmo's first and second scenarios, but also softens the blow 
> when (your first) task is coldly invalidated with only four words of 
> explanation. (Validators: that's not a criticism - I understand the time 
> pressure.)
> 
> Also, not all users will read the docs - while training resources are useful, 
> these little nudges of understanding help all users - even the new ones who 
> enthusiastically started but didn't read the instructions.
> 
> David
> 
> On 24 August 2015 at 17:18, Jarmo Kivekäs  wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I've been lurking on the mailing list for a while, but I'm still fairly
> new to HOT. I though I'd pitch in.
> 
> I definitely recognized myself from Martin's write up as belonging to
> the set of contributors who commit changes but don't mark tiles as done.
> Below are some reasons why I've not marked tiles as complete in the past.
> 
> 1. I think part of the reason is that I started out mapping on my own (I
> haven't found a local community, nor was I introduced to mapping on a
> mapathon). Therefore I haven't been able to just quickly ask someone
> advice about something I'm unsure about. In these cases I've usually
> left a comment in the tasking manager about whatever I was unsure about,
> mapped the rest, but not marked the tile as done.
> 
> Not marking the tile done is me being conservative, I guess. As a new
> mapper it is currently difficult to get feedback on the quality of your
> mapping, you pretty much needs to actively seek it out. Getting
> notifications when there are new comments on tiles you've worked on
> would be nice.
> 
> 2. When parts of a region are already mapped (probably form before the
> activation was created) but the tiles that are already mapped are not
> marked as done. I'm reluctant to mark a grid as done without making any
> changes to it, even if it seemingly fills all the criterion for the
> task. Especially when the grid has been locked my multiple users in the
> past. "They didn't think it was as done, I'm probably missing
> something." I realize that this thinking only propagates the problem,
> since I'll just be one more user on the list.
> 
> 3. Grids can be pretty large. Sometimes you just don't manage to map it
> completely in a short sitting. I know grids can be split, but...
> 
> 4. Sometimes I'll for example only be mapping roads. Doing this will
> result in many tiles being checked out and changesets are generated, but
> no tiles are actually being finished.
> 
> 
> -- Jarmo
> 
> 
> On 24.08.2015 16:37, Martin Dittus wrote:
> >
> >> On 24 Aug 2015, at 11:22, john whelan  wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd also like to see a third option on the tasking manger "I've done some 
> >> work but not completed the tile could someone review it please."  I'd 
> >> rather catch errors early and some new mappers may not feel confident 
> >> enough to mark a tile complete.
> >
> > Considering better workflows for “incomplete” submissions is well 
> > worthwhile. This week I found that about half of all HOT contributors never 
> > mark their first task as “done” although they contributed edits to the map.
> >
> > I’ve written it up here, with stats and a brief discussion:
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dekstop/diary/35649
> >
> > m.
> 
> ___
> 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] Validation

[David Toy]

Hi Jarmo. Welcome!

My introduction/onboarding to HOT was almost identical to Jarmo's - and I
can relate very clearly to all the points he has raised. I suspect that
there are a few more lurkers on this list who will be similar.

Pierre G's document suggests renaming the 'mark as done' button to 'submit
for review'.

A simplification of terms / altered workflow would have helped me
initially. Taking the example of the done button, 'submit for review'
implies that:
- a) it's ok to make a mistake getting started - someone will catch it, and
- b) I should expect feedback

This helps with Jarmo's first and second scenarios, but also softens the
blow when (your first) task is coldly invalidated with only four words of
explanation. (Validators: that's not a criticism - I understand the time
pressure.)

Also, not all users will read the docs - while training resources are
useful, these little nudges of understanding help all users - even the new
ones who enthusiastically started but didn't read the instructions.

David

On 24 August 2015 at 17:18, Jarmo Kivekäs  wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I've been lurking on the mailing list for a while, but I'm still fairly
> new to HOT. I though I'd pitch in.
>
> I definitely recognized myself from Martin's write up as belonging to
> the set of contributors who commit changes but don't mark tiles as done.
> Below are some reasons why I've not marked tiles as complete in the past.
>
> 1. I think part of the reason is that I started out mapping on my own (I
> haven't found a local community, nor was I introduced to mapping on a
> mapathon). Therefore I haven't been able to just quickly ask someone
> advice about something I'm unsure about. In these cases I've usually
> left a comment in the tasking manager about whatever I was unsure about,
> mapped the rest, but not marked the tile as done.
>
> Not marking the tile done is me being conservative, I guess. As a new
> mapper it is currently difficult to get feedback on the quality of your
> mapping, you pretty much needs to actively seek it out. Getting
> notifications when there are new comments on tiles you've worked on
> would be nice.
>
> 2. When parts of a region are already mapped (probably form before the
> activation was created) but the tiles that are already mapped are not
> marked as done. I'm reluctant to mark a grid as done without making any
> changes to it, even if it seemingly fills all the criterion for the
> task. Especially when the grid has been locked my multiple users in the
> past. "They didn't think it was as done, I'm probably missing
> something." I realize that this thinking only propagates the problem,
> since I'll just be one more user on the list.
>
> 3. Grids can be pretty large. Sometimes you just don't manage to map it
> completely in a short sitting. I know grids can be split, but...
>
> 4. Sometimes I'll for example only be mapping roads. Doing this will
> result in many tiles being checked out and changesets are generated, but
> no tiles are actually being finished.
>
>
> -- Jarmo
>
>
> On 24.08.2015 16:37, Martin Dittus wrote:
> >
> >> On 24 Aug 2015, at 11:22, john whelan  wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd also like to see a third option on the tasking manger "I've done
> some work but not completed the tile could someone review it please."  I'd
> rather catch errors early and some new mappers may not feel confident
> enough to mark a tile complete.
> >
> > Considering better workflows for “incomplete” submissions is well
> worthwhile. This week I found that about half of all HOT contributors never
> mark their first task as “done” although they contributed edits to the map.
> >
> > I’ve written it up here, with stats and a brief discussion:
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dekstop/diary/35649
> >
> > m.
>
> ___
> 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] Validation

[Suzan Reed]

Are you referring to one time mappers or any who map? The following refers to 
both: 

I often work on a tile and don’t have enough time to finish, know there’s more 
that needs to be done, or ask for a review by another mapper, so I don’t mark 
it Done. When there are a lot of buildings I don’t do the tile all in one 
sitting. There are many reasons for checking out a tile and not finishing it. I 
also leave a Comment describing my work and what more needs doing. It’s helpful 
to scroll through the list of contributors to one tile to see how many have 
worked on it and to read other’s comments. Encouraging Comments would be good. 

The “lock” “unlock” function is not intuitive. “Check out” and “check in” would 
be easier to understand. 

Suzan 


On Aug 24, 2015, at 6:37 AM, Martin Dittus  wrote:


> On 24 Aug 2015, at 11:22, john whelan  wrote:
> 
> I'd also like to see a third option on the tasking manger "I've done some 
> work but not completed the tile could someone review it please."  I'd rather 
> catch errors early and some new mappers may not feel confident enough to mark 
> a tile complete.

Considering better workflows for “incomplete” submissions is well worthwhile. 
This week I found that about half of all HOT contributors never mark their 
first task as “done” although they contributed edits to the map. 

I’ve written it up here, with stats and a brief discussion:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dekstop/diary/35649

m.
___
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] Validation

[Jarmo Kivekäs]

Hi!

I've been lurking on the mailing list for a while, but I'm still fairly
new to HOT. I though I'd pitch in.

I definitely recognized myself from Martin's write up as belonging to
the set of contributors who commit changes but don't mark tiles as done.
Below are some reasons why I've not marked tiles as complete in the past.

1. I think part of the reason is that I started out mapping on my own (I
haven't found a local community, nor was I introduced to mapping on a
mapathon). Therefore I haven't been able to just quickly ask someone
advice about something I'm unsure about. In these cases I've usually
left a comment in the tasking manager about whatever I was unsure about,
mapped the rest, but not marked the tile as done.

Not marking the tile done is me being conservative, I guess. As a new
mapper it is currently difficult to get feedback on the quality of your
mapping, you pretty much needs to actively seek it out. Getting
notifications when there are new comments on tiles you've worked on
would be nice.

2. When parts of a region are already mapped (probably form before the
activation was created) but the tiles that are already mapped are not
marked as done. I'm reluctant to mark a grid as done without making any
changes to it, even if it seemingly fills all the criterion for the
task. Especially when the grid has been locked my multiple users in the
past. "They didn't think it was as done, I'm probably missing
something." I realize that this thinking only propagates the problem,
since I'll just be one more user on the list.

3. Grids can be pretty large. Sometimes you just don't manage to map it
completely in a short sitting. I know grids can be split, but...

4. Sometimes I'll for example only be mapping roads. Doing this will
result in many tiles being checked out and changesets are generated, but
no tiles are actually being finished.


-- Jarmo


On 24.08.2015 16:37, Martin Dittus wrote:
> 
>> On 24 Aug 2015, at 11:22, john whelan  wrote:
>>
>> I'd also like to see a third option on the tasking manger "I've done some 
>> work but not completed the tile could someone review it please."  I'd rather 
>> catch errors early and some new mappers may not feel confident enough to 
>> mark a tile complete.
> 
> Considering better workflows for “incomplete” submissions is well worthwhile. 
> This week I found that about half of all HOT contributors never mark their 
> first task as “done” although they contributed edits to the map. 
> 
> I’ve written it up here, with stats and a brief discussion:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dekstop/diary/35649
> 
> m.

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

Re: [HOT] Validation

[john whelan]

I also found that in a group of GIS students doing a maperthon who were new
to HOT perhaps a quarter marked a tile complete although a number of tiles
were complete.

Cheerio John

On 24 August 2015 at 09:37, Martin Dittus  wrote:

>
> > On 24 Aug 2015, at 11:22, john whelan  wrote:
> >
> > I'd also like to see a third option on the tasking manger "I've done
> some work but not completed the tile could someone review it please."  I'd
> rather catch errors early and some new mappers may not feel confident
> enough to mark a tile complete.
>
> Considering better workflows for “incomplete” submissions is well
> worthwhile. This week I found that about half of all HOT contributors never
> mark their first task as “done” although they contributed edits to the map.
>
> I’ve written it up here, with stats and a brief discussion:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dekstop/diary/35649
>
> m.
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Martin Dittus]

> On 24 Aug 2015, at 11:22, john whelan  wrote:
> 
> I'd also like to see a third option on the tasking manger "I've done some 
> work but not completed the tile could someone review it please."  I'd rather 
> catch errors early and some new mappers may not feel confident enough to mark 
> a tile complete.

Considering better workflows for “incomplete” submissions is well worthwhile. 
This week I found that about half of all HOT contributors never mark their 
first task as “done” although they contributed edits to the map. 

I’ve written it up here, with stats and a brief discussion:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dekstop/diary/35649

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

Re: [HOT] Validation

[john whelan]

Pierre's comments align much more closely to my own thoughts than the
proposed current HOT training course and seem well thought out.

I'd also like to see a third option on the tasking manger "I've done some
work but not completed the tile could someone review it please."  I'd
rather catch errors early and some new mappers may not feel confident
enough to mark a tile complete.

Thanks John

On 24 August 2015 at 02:07, Pierre GIRAUD  wrote:

> Interesting.
>
> For your information, I've recently written a document in which I
> describe what I think could be the future enhancements in the tasking
> manager.
> Specifically, there's a section about validation you may want to read.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l3PwPbUPfXptQumZK_a_xioPYiGXAAw8JpKQhADmsJk/edit?usp=sharing
>
> Regards,
> Pierre
>
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 6:40 AM, Suzan Reed  wrote:
> > Friends,
> >
> > I would like to see some boundaries set on who validates. Someone with
> less than 50 changesets should not be validating, or even marking a tile
> Done. Sometimes I think new mapper validate and invalidate just for the fun
> of it. They quickly validate or invalidate and don’t map or complete a tile.
> >
> > Would it be possible to require a validator to !. complete the
> validation course, and 2. have a set number of tiles completed? I know this
> will probably be an arbitrary number and we can all argue all the many
> benchmarks, but at least set it high enough so newbies are validating.
> >
> > I’ve often thought the Tasking Manager could use a little tweaking so
> the Done, Validate, and Invalidate buttons are more intuitively understood.
> I’ve seen newbies mark a tile Done when they finish their session. I think
> I might have done that in my first days, too.
> >
> > Like John’s idea of having a designated validation person or team
> watching for tiles that need validation in a specific project.  Blake
> Girdardot actively involved in the Myanmar mapping, and it was very helpful.
> >
> > Possibly the validation course needs a bit of editing. These modules are
> up for comments. Currently a team is editing for tone and clarity, but it
> is not integrated into the modules yet.
> >
> > Suzan
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 23, 2015, at 4:34 PM, john whelan  wrote:
> >
> > I've been looking through the new courses and one thing that hit me was
> my idea of validation seems quite different to the concept I've seen so far
> in the course so I think we should start by deciding what we want our tile
> validators to do.
> >
> > These are my thoughts.
> >
> > Higher level validation can use different tools over a wider area.
> >
> > First comment is what I've found to be the most successful is not to
> declare something invalid unless its really bad.  You want the mapper to
> feel welcome, you want them to map again, INVALID missing a hut doesn't do
> that.  I've had people send me that on one of my tiles by the way, just map
> the hut and move on.
> >
> > Generally I'll sit on one or more projects and validate just those
> projects as the tiles are done.
> >
> > The objective is to give feedback within 24 hrs or less to the mapper.
> >
> > This feedback serves two purposes, one we are interested in your mapping
> and second the earlier I can catch someone making a mistake the fewer
> errors I'll need to fix in the future.
> >
> > In Cameroon using these techniques we've actually managed to completely
> map and validate several projects.
> >
> > Note to Project managers if you want your project completed get yourself
> a validator who validates the tiles as they are done.
> >
> > When you start on a new project take a look at the mapper, if they've
> mapped twice three months ago then don't waste your time sending them
> emails just clean up.
> >
> > Personally I only use JOSM when validating, you do have to press the
> validate button for it to do its thing by the way.  It will only
> automatically validate those edits you have made when you upload not the
> rest.
> >
> > Having said that there is a place for iD when validating, two of the
> mappers I work with validate as a team one does the careful visual checking
> in iD, the other runs JOSM over the end product.
> >
> > The quality of the imagery used seems to have an impact on the quality
> of the mapping.  Especially with new mappers, less than ideal imagery means
> validation is slow and tedious.
> >
> > I think we have to ask ourselves about how much we are prepared to pay
> for what quality of work.  ie service level agreement.
> >
> > When we have a very large number of new mappers who are making lots of
> errors then sometimes the judgement call is a JOSM validation to clean up
> the worst errors and tag it "validated in JOSM" so if someone has the time
> they can go back over it.  Select two top tiles and two base tiles and
> bring them into JOSM, now download the area between directly from OSM run
> the validator tool and do the search checks, ie area=yes etc.  Its fast and
> picks up

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Pierre GIRAUD]

Interesting.

For your information, I've recently written a document in which I
describe what I think could be the future enhancements in the tasking
manager.
Specifically, there's a section about validation you may want to read.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l3PwPbUPfXptQumZK_a_xioPYiGXAAw8JpKQhADmsJk/edit?usp=sharing

Regards,
Pierre

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 6:40 AM, Suzan Reed  wrote:
> Friends,
>
> I would like to see some boundaries set on who validates. Someone with less 
> than 50 changesets should not be validating, or even marking a tile Done. 
> Sometimes I think new mapper validate and invalidate just for the fun of it. 
> They quickly validate or invalidate and don’t map or complete a tile.
>
> Would it be possible to require a validator to !. complete the validation 
> course, and 2. have a set number of tiles completed? I know this will 
> probably be an arbitrary number and we can all argue all the many benchmarks, 
> but at least set it high enough so newbies are validating.
>
> I’ve often thought the Tasking Manager could use a little tweaking so the 
> Done, Validate, and Invalidate buttons are more intuitively understood. I’ve 
> seen newbies mark a tile Done when they finish their session. I think I might 
> have done that in my first days, too.
>
> Like John’s idea of having a designated validation person or team watching 
> for tiles that need validation in a specific project.  Blake Girdardot 
> actively involved in the Myanmar mapping, and it was very helpful.
>
> Possibly the validation course needs a bit of editing. These modules are up 
> for comments. Currently a team is editing for tone and clarity, but it is not 
> integrated into the modules yet.
>
> Suzan
>
>
>
> On Aug 23, 2015, at 4:34 PM, john whelan  wrote:
>
> I've been looking through the new courses and one thing that hit me was my 
> idea of validation seems quite different to the concept I've seen so far in 
> the course so I think we should start by deciding what we want our tile 
> validators to do.
>
> These are my thoughts.
>
> Higher level validation can use different tools over a wider area.
>
> First comment is what I've found to be the most successful is not to declare 
> something invalid unless its really bad.  You want the mapper to feel 
> welcome, you want them to map again, INVALID missing a hut doesn't do that.  
> I've had people send me that on one of my tiles by the way, just map the hut 
> and move on.
>
> Generally I'll sit on one or more projects and validate just those projects 
> as the tiles are done.
>
> The objective is to give feedback within 24 hrs or less to the mapper.
>
> This feedback serves two purposes, one we are interested in your mapping and 
> second the earlier I can catch someone making a mistake the fewer errors I'll 
> need to fix in the future.
>
> In Cameroon using these techniques we've actually managed to completely map 
> and validate several projects.
>
> Note to Project managers if you want your project completed get yourself a 
> validator who validates the tiles as they are done.
>
> When you start on a new project take a look at the mapper, if they've mapped 
> twice three months ago then don't waste your time sending them emails just 
> clean up.
>
> Personally I only use JOSM when validating, you do have to press the validate 
> button for it to do its thing by the way.  It will only automatically 
> validate those edits you have made when you upload not the rest.
>
> Having said that there is a place for iD when validating, two of the mappers 
> I work with validate as a team one does the careful visual checking in iD, 
> the other runs JOSM over the end product.
>
> The quality of the imagery used seems to have an impact on the quality of the 
> mapping.  Especially with new mappers, less than ideal imagery means 
> validation is slow and tedious.
>
> I think we have to ask ourselves about how much we are prepared to pay for 
> what quality of work.  ie service level agreement.
>
> When we have a very large number of new mappers who are making lots of errors 
> then sometimes the judgement call is a JOSM validation to clean up the worst 
> errors and tag it "validated in JOSM" so if someone has the time they can go 
> back over it.  Select two top tiles and two base tiles and bring them into 
> JOSM, now download the area between directly from OSM run the validator tool 
> and do the search checks, ie area=yes etc.  Its fast and picks up many 
> mistakes but isn't the same quality as a normal validation.
>
> Things to look for are untagged ways - JOSM validation will pick these up.
>
> area=yes can be landuse=residential or building=yes
> zebra crossings in anywhere but the UK shouldn't be there.
>
> crossing highways not connected, throws the routing software.
>
> In Africa in rural areas highway=footway should be highway=path same for 
> highway=pedestrian, careful how you give feedback if they are an experienced 
> OSM mapper they're used to tagging wi

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Suzan Reed]

Friends, 

I would like to see some boundaries set on who validates. Someone with less 
than 50 changesets should not be validating, or even marking a tile Done. 
Sometimes I think new mapper validate and invalidate just for the fun of it. 
They quickly validate or invalidate and don’t map or complete a tile. 

Would it be possible to require a validator to !. complete the validation 
course, and 2. have a set number of tiles completed? I know this will probably 
be an arbitrary number and we can all argue all the many benchmarks, but at 
least set it high enough so newbies are validating. 

I’ve often thought the Tasking Manager could use a little tweaking so the Done, 
Validate, and Invalidate buttons are more intuitively understood. I’ve seen 
newbies mark a tile Done when they finish their session. I think I might have 
done that in my first days, too. 

Like John’s idea of having a designated validation person or team watching for 
tiles that need validation in a specific project.  Blake Girdardot actively 
involved in the Myanmar mapping, and it was very helpful. 

Possibly the validation course needs a bit of editing. These modules are up for 
comments. Currently a team is editing for tone and clarity, but it is not 
integrated into the modules yet. 

Suzan 



On Aug 23, 2015, at 4:34 PM, john whelan  wrote:

I've been looking through the new courses and one thing that hit me was my idea 
of validation seems quite different to the concept I've seen so far in the 
course so I think we should start by deciding what we want our tile validators 
to do.

These are my thoughts.

Higher level validation can use different tools over a wider area.

First comment is what I've found to be the most successful is not to declare 
something invalid unless its really bad.  You want the mapper to feel welcome, 
you want them to map again, INVALID missing a hut doesn't do that.  I've had 
people send me that on one of my tiles by the way, just map the hut and move on.

Generally I'll sit on one or more projects and validate just those projects as 
the tiles are done.

The objective is to give feedback within 24 hrs or less to the mapper.

This feedback serves two purposes, one we are interested in your mapping and 
second the earlier I can catch someone making a mistake the fewer errors I'll 
need to fix in the future.

In Cameroon using these techniques we've actually managed to completely map and 
validate several projects.

Note to Project managers if you want your project completed get yourself a 
validator who validates the tiles as they are done.

When you start on a new project take a look at the mapper, if they've mapped 
twice three months ago then don't waste your time sending them emails just 
clean up.

Personally I only use JOSM when validating, you do have to press the validate 
button for it to do its thing by the way.  It will only automatically validate 
those edits you have made when you upload not the rest.

Having said that there is a place for iD when validating, two of the mappers I 
work with validate as a team one does the careful visual checking in iD, the 
other runs JOSM over the end product.

The quality of the imagery used seems to have an impact on the quality of the 
mapping.  Especially with new mappers, less than ideal imagery means validation 
is slow and tedious.

I think we have to ask ourselves about how much we are prepared to pay for what 
quality of work.  ie service level agreement.

When we have a very large number of new mappers who are making lots of errors 
then sometimes the judgement call is a JOSM validation to clean up the worst 
errors and tag it "validated in JOSM" so if someone has the time they can go 
back over it.  Select two top tiles and two base tiles and bring them into 
JOSM, now download the area between directly from OSM run the validator tool 
and do the search checks, ie area=yes etc.  Its fast and picks up many mistakes 
but isn't the same quality as a normal validation.

Things to look for are untagged ways - JOSM validation will pick these up.

area=yes can be landuse=residential or building=yes
zebra crossings in anywhere but the UK shouldn't be there.

crossing highways not connected, throws the routing software.

In Africa in rural areas highway=footway should be highway=path same for 
highway=pedestrian, careful how you give feedback if they are an experienced 
OSM mapper they're used to tagging with other values and you want to retain 
them so point them to the African highway wiki bit and suggest 
highway=unclassified, track or path are the most commonly used values in rural 
areas.

Buildings not squared, select buildings=yes the select each mapper in turn if 
the don't have any huts use q to square them all at once. This is a time 
management issue if we had more time we should do them one at a time reality 
does it really matter if the building is square?  We know the rough shape and 
size and buildings are expensive in mapper time.  Locally

Re: [HOT] validation

[Eric Christensen]

On Saturday, June 27, 2015 09:11:39 PM john whelan wrote:

> Could some one think of a way to have a list of projects that are validated
> in this way that newcomers can find easily so they can get a bit of support
> and don't feel too isolated.  It would need commitment from someone to
> validate a project rather than the project manager adding it to the list.

Not exactly the same as what you were looking for but in another FOSS project 
I'm affiliated with we stood up an Askbot[0] instance that allows people to 
ask questions and then have others answer the questions.  Additional answers 
can be provided and a vote can be had to bring the best answer to the top.

--Eric

[0] https://askbot.com/

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

Re: [HOT] validation

[Dale Kunce]

Susan feel free to edit the instructions of the Canaan task number 870. Arc
made a gist tracing guide to try and help with gifs and lit of pictures.

If the final result could be in markdown that would help the tasking
manager admins a lot.

Dale

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015, 7:18 PM Suzan Reed  wrote:

> The instructions are not always clear, often have information newcomers
> don't understand, and are formatted in a way that make them difficult to
> grasp.
>
> People read information on the web differently than they do on paper.
> Short paragraphs of one sentence, lots of space, bulleted lists all work
> well.
>
> I've been thinking this for a few days. I'm adept in web usability
> (taught/lectured on the subject) and I think it's possible to put together
> a form activators could fill in that would make the instructions clearer.
> Instructions or a wiki on how to write for an activation could be helpful.
>
> I could edit one for clarity, but would need someone to volunteer their
> activation instructions so I know I'm not going to offend. ;-)
>
> Cheers!
>
> Suzan
>
>
> On Jun 29, 2015, at 3:12 PM, john whelan wrote:
>
> I think if we get something like Nepal crop up again that this would be an
> excellent introduction to HOT mapping and would help on the data quality
> side.  However we have around a thousand open projects in HOT at the moment
> and making an intro like this for each one would take quite a bit of effort.
>
> Is the HOT training group aware of these?
>
> Thanks John
>
> On 29 June 2015 at 15:53, pierre mirlesse 
> wrote:
> John whelan mentioned in his note: "If you put something in the task
> instructions then people have to read them
> and there seems to be a tendency to just map first and read the
> instructions afterwards"
>
> inputs: maybe the descriptions and instructions format of the Tasking
> Manager a little too "dry" for new mappers.
> maybe a short video conversation/intro 2-3 mn about Why the task was
> created, by Whom and how it will be used
> could insure more "stickyness/interest" of new mappers to the task and
> promoting reading it's description.
> John if interested to test this out... let me know. Here are some of the
> intros I've done for other tasks:
> How To Map in Openstreetmap : Basic Training ID Editor HOT Task #1090
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> How To Map in Openstreetmap : Basic Training ID Editor...
> View on www.youtube.com
> Preview by Yahoo
>
> How To Map in OSM : Advanced training with JOSM HOT Task #1062
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> How To Map in OSM : Advanced training with JOSM HO...
> View on www.youtube.com
> Preview by Yahoo
>
>
> Pierre
>
>
> ___
> 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] validation

[Suzan Reed]

The instructions are not always clear, often have information newcomers don't 
understand, and are formatted in a way that make them difficult to grasp. 

People read information on the web differently than they do on paper. Short 
paragraphs of one sentence, lots of space, bulleted lists all work well. 

I've been thinking this for a few days. I'm adept in web usability 
(taught/lectured on the subject) and I think it's possible to put together a 
form activators could fill in that would make the instructions clearer. 
Instructions or a wiki on how to write for an activation could be helpful. 

I could edit one for clarity, but would need someone to volunteer their 
activation instructions so I know I'm not going to offend. ;-)

Cheers! 

Suzan 


On Jun 29, 2015, at 3:12 PM, john whelan wrote:

I think if we get something like Nepal crop up again that this would be an 
excellent introduction to HOT mapping and would help on the data quality side.  
However we have around a thousand open projects in HOT at the moment and making 
an intro like this for each one would take quite a bit of effort.

Is the HOT training group aware of these?

Thanks John

On 29 June 2015 at 15:53, pierre mirlesse  wrote:
John whelan mentioned in his note: "If you put something in the task 
instructions then people have to read them
and there seems to be a tendency to just map first and read the instructions 
afterwards"

inputs: maybe the descriptions and instructions format of the Tasking Manager a 
little too "dry" for new mappers. 
maybe a short video conversation/intro 2-3 mn about Why the task was created, 
by Whom and how it will be used 
could insure more "stickyness/interest" of new mappers to the task and 
promoting reading it's description.
John if interested to test this out... let me know. Here are some of the intros 
I've done for other tasks:
How To Map in Openstreetmap : Basic Training ID Editor HOT Task #1090  
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
How To Map in Openstreetmap : Basic Training ID Editor...
View on www.youtube.com
Preview by Yahoo
 
How To Map in OSM : Advanced training with JOSM HOT Task #1062
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
How To Map in OSM : Advanced training with JOSM HO...
View on www.youtube.com
Preview by Yahoo
 

Pierre


___
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] validation

[john whelan]

I think if we get something like Nepal crop up again that this would be an
excellent introduction to HOT mapping and would help on the data quality
side.  However we have around a thousand open projects in HOT at the moment
and making an intro like this for each one would take quite a bit of effort.

Is the HOT training group aware of these?

Thanks John

On 29 June 2015 at 15:53, pierre mirlesse  wrote:

> John whelan mentioned in his note: "If you put something in the task
> instructions then people have to read them
> and there seems to be a tendency to just map first and read the instructions
> afterwards"
>
> inputs: maybe the descriptions and instructions format of the Tasking
> Manager a little too "dry" for new mappers.
> maybe a short video conversation/intro 2-3 mn about Why the task was
> created, by Whom and how it will be used
> could insure more "stickyness/interest" of new mappers to the task and
> promoting reading it's description.
> John if interested to test this out... let me know. Here are some of the
> intros I've done for other tasks:
> How To Map in Openstreetmap : Basic Training ID Editor HOT Task #1090
> 
>
>
> [image: image] 
>
>
>
>
>
> How To Map in Openstreetmap : Basic Training ID Editor...
> 
> View on www.youtube.com 
> Preview by Yahoo
>
> How To Map in OSM : Advanced training with JOSM HOT Task #1062
> 
>
>
> [image: image] 
>
>
>
>
>
> How To Map in OSM : Advanced training with JOSM HO...
> 
> View on www.youtube.com 
> Preview by Yahoo
>
>
> Pierre
>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] validation

[pierre mirlesse]

John whelan mentioned in his note: "If you put something in the task 
instructions then people have to read themand there seems to be a tendency to 
just map first and read the instructions afterwards"
inputs: maybe the descriptions and instructions format of the Tasking Manager a 
little too "dry" for new mappers. maybe a short video conversation/intro 2-3 mn 
about Why the task was created, by Whom and how it will be used could insure 
more "stickyness/interest" of new mappers to the task and promoting reading 
it's description.John if interested to test this out... let me know. Here are 
some of the intros I've done for other tasks:How To Map in Openstreetmap : 
Basic Training ID Editor HOT Task #1090  
|   |
|   |  |   |   |   |   |   |
| How To Map in Openstreetmap : Basic Training ID Editor... |
|  |
| View on www.youtube.com | Preview by Yahoo |
|  |
|   |

How To Map in OSM : Advanced training with JOSM HOT Task #1062

|   |
|   |  |   |   |   |   |   |
| How To Map in OSM : Advanced training with JOSM HO... |
|  |
| View on www.youtube.com | Preview by Yahoo |
|  |
|   |


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

Re: [HOT] validation

[Dale Kunce]

I like the done but needs help option. This would be really helpful both
during mapathons and for big activations where we have lots of new mappers.

On Sun, Jun 28, 2015, 2:05 PM john whelan  wrote:

> >Another idea which comes to my mind: let contributors have a third choice
> for their task. Apart from "Unlock" and "Mark task as done" something which
> marks the task as done but calls for more-or-less immediate validation
> because the contributor wants feedback about the quality of his work. Such
> tiles would be displayed in a different colour and form a priority queue
> for validation.
>
> This reduces the pressure of a direct interaction but offers newbies a
> feeling that they will not be left alone.
>
> I like this idea but it would need some method of picking them up.  There
> is probably a thousand open projects at the moment too many to scan through
> for one person.  The tile needn't be completely done just a please verify
> if what I've done so far is complete.
>
> On a personal note your validations on 1094 were appreciated, it helped
> lighten the validation load and provided a quicker turn round on the
> validation.  Often when you look at a project the problem mappers haven't
> mapped in seven months so there isn't much point in sending them any
> feedback which is why I just scan three or four projects that way I can
> validate a tile as soon as its done.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 28 June 2015 at 12:13, Michael Heißmeier <
> michae...@digital-filestore.de> wrote:
>
>>  Hi all,
>>
>> john whelan schrieb am 28.06.2015 um 15:00:
>>
>>  The problem with email addresses are that when Nepal started up we had
>> several thousand new mappers in the first few days, if even 5% contacted
>> the email address the person gets swamped and burns out.
>>
>>
>> I agree that any direct interaction outside a mapathon venue sounds
>> problematic. Even if we had a dedicated irc channel then I imagine several
>> people asking questions at the same time and a few validators trying to
>> sort that out and answer simultaneously...
>> Not to forget that if such an option were offered then such a channel
>> would have to be supervised at specified hours. Would require a roster for
>> validators.
>>
>>  Maperthons, 1093 and 1094 I did quite a bit of validation on these,
>> much of the initial mapping was done in Maperthons and the quality was
>> uneven.
>>
>>   While validating for projects 831, 833 and 1094 I contacted those
>> contributors who made systematic errors, I did so either from the comment
>> field in the tasking manager or through the OSM message system when I felt
>> a longer explanation possibly with a few images was required. A fraction of
>> them responded and those who did were grateful for my comments. As I
>> expected, the quality of their mapping was directly correlated to their
>> experience in terms of contributions to OSM in general and HOT in
>> particular.
>>
>>  If you put something in the task instructions then people have to read
>> them and there seems to be a tendency to just map first and read the
>> instructions afterwards.  In African villages highway=pedestrian isn't on
>> the list of highways for Africa in the wiki.  Once you nudge them once or
>> twice there is far less clean up to do when validating so ideally a tool
>> that showed any new mapper who has mapped would be very nice but it isn't
>> going to happen overnight.  More validators would be nice but they need to
>> be tactful, have read the instructions and also have some knowledge and
>> experience.  I recall one of my tiles was bruskly invalidated because I
>> hadn't mapped something that was not required in the instructions.
>>
>>   People might not be reading instructions but they will have to read
>> the contribute tab. Maybe something like a clearly visible message "please
>> read the instructions before you start - if in doubt ask on the mailing
>> list" could help here.
>>
>> Another idea which comes to my mind: let contributors have a third choice
>> for their task. Apart from "Unlock" and "Mark task as done" something which
>> marks the task as done but calls for more-or-less immediate validation
>> because the contributor wants feedback about the quality of his work. Such
>> tiles would be displayed in a different colour and form a priority queue
>> for validation.
>>
>> This reduces the pressure of a direct interaction but offers newbies a
>> feeling that they will not be left alone.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> On 28 June 2015 at 07:35, Dale Kunce  wrote:
>>
>>> John and Susan I love this idea. The Missing Maps projects are generally
>>> really good for new mappers. We could set up a couple of tasks outside a
>>> mapathon just for this purpose.
>>>
>>> Would you once a list of people you can contact in the task
>>> instructions. These folks will also be the ones responsible for being the
>>> validates and Mentors
>>>
>>>  On Sat, Jun 27, 2015, 9:21 PM Suzan Reed  wrote:
>>>
 John mentors me, and it

Re: [HOT] validation

[john whelan]

>Another idea which comes to my mind: let contributors have a third choice
for their task. Apart from "Unlock" and "Mark task as done" something which
marks the task as done but calls for more-or-less immediate validation
because the contributor wants feedback about the quality of his work. Such
tiles would be displayed in a different colour and form a priority queue
for validation.

This reduces the pressure of a direct interaction but offers newbies a
feeling that they will not be left alone.

I like this idea but it would need some method of picking them up.  There
is probably a thousand open projects at the moment too many to scan through
for one person.  The tile needn't be completely done just a please verify
if what I've done so far is complete.

On a personal note your validations on 1094 were appreciated, it helped
lighten the validation load and provided a quicker turn round on the
validation.  Often when you look at a project the problem mappers haven't
mapped in seven months so there isn't much point in sending them any
feedback which is why I just scan three or four projects that way I can
validate a tile as soon as its done.

Cheerio John

On 28 June 2015 at 12:13, Michael Heißmeier 
wrote:

>  Hi all,
>
> john whelan schrieb am 28.06.2015 um 15:00:
>
>  The problem with email addresses are that when Nepal started up we had
> several thousand new mappers in the first few days, if even 5% contacted
> the email address the person gets swamped and burns out.
>
>
> I agree that any direct interaction outside a mapathon venue sounds
> problematic. Even if we had a dedicated irc channel then I imagine several
> people asking questions at the same time and a few validators trying to
> sort that out and answer simultaneously...
> Not to forget that if such an option were offered then such a channel
> would have to be supervised at specified hours. Would require a roster for
> validators.
>
>  Maperthons, 1093 and 1094 I did quite a bit of validation on these, much
> of the initial mapping was done in Maperthons and the quality was uneven.
>
>   While validating for projects 831, 833 and 1094 I contacted those
> contributors who made systematic errors, I did so either from the comment
> field in the tasking manager or through the OSM message system when I felt
> a longer explanation possibly with a few images was required. A fraction of
> them responded and those who did were grateful for my comments. As I
> expected, the quality of their mapping was directly correlated to their
> experience in terms of contributions to OSM in general and HOT in
> particular.
>
>  If you put something in the task instructions then people have to read
> them and there seems to be a tendency to just map first and read the
> instructions afterwards.  In African villages highway=pedestrian isn't on
> the list of highways for Africa in the wiki.  Once you nudge them once or
> twice there is far less clean up to do when validating so ideally a tool
> that showed any new mapper who has mapped would be very nice but it isn't
> going to happen overnight.  More validators would be nice but they need to
> be tactful, have read the instructions and also have some knowledge and
> experience.  I recall one of my tiles was bruskly invalidated because I
> hadn't mapped something that was not required in the instructions.
>
>   People might not be reading instructions but they will have to read the
> contribute tab. Maybe something like a clearly visible message "please read
> the instructions before you start - if in doubt ask on the mailing list"
> could help here.
>
> Another idea which comes to my mind: let contributors have a third choice
> for their task. Apart from "Unlock" and "Mark task as done" something which
> marks the task as done but calls for more-or-less immediate validation
> because the contributor wants feedback about the quality of his work. Such
> tiles would be displayed in a different colour and form a priority queue
> for validation.
>
> This reduces the pressure of a direct interaction but offers newbies a
> feeling that they will not be left alone.
>
> Regards
>
> Michael
>
>
> On 28 June 2015 at 07:35, Dale Kunce  wrote:
>
>> John and Susan I love this idea. The Missing Maps projects are generally
>> really good for new mappers. We could set up a couple of tasks outside a
>> mapathon just for this purpose.
>>
>> Would you once a list of people you can contact in the task instructions.
>> These folks will also be the ones responsible for being the validates and
>> Mentors
>>
>>  On Sat, Jun 27, 2015, 9:21 PM Suzan Reed  wrote:
>>
>>> John mentors me, and it's been extremely valuable to have him gently
>>> mentioning problems.
>>>
>>> Having a list of projects for new people where they can get some
>>> mentoring as they learn to map would be exellent. Being isolated isn't
>>> easy. Being on a team and working with other mappers encourages us to do
>>> more mapping, and it's more interesting and dare I say, fu

Re: [HOT] validation

[Michael Heißmeier]

Hi all,

john whelan schrieb am 28.06.2015 um 15:00:
The problem with email addresses are that when Nepal started up we had several 
thousand new mappers in the first few days, if even 5% contacted the email 
address the person gets swamped and burns out.




I agree that any direct interaction outside a mapathon venue sounds problematic. 
Even if we had a dedicated irc channel then I imagine several people asking 
questions at the same time and a few validators trying to sort that out and 
answer simultaneously...
Not to forget that if such an option were offered then such a channel would have 
to be supervised at specified hours. Would require a roster for validators.


Maperthons, 1093 and 1094 I did quite a bit of validation on these, much of 
the initial mapping was done in Maperthons and the quality was uneven.


While validating for projects 831, 833 and 1094 I contacted those contributors 
who made systematic errors, I did so either from the comment field in the 
tasking manager or through the OSM message system when I felt a longer 
explanation possibly with a few images was required. A fraction of them 
responded and those who did were grateful for my comments. As I expected, the 
quality of their mapping was directly correlated to their experience in terms of 
contributions to OSM in general and HOT in particular.


If you put something in the task instructions then people have to read them 
and there seems to be a tendency to just map first and read the instructions 
afterwards.  In African villages highway=pedestrian isn't on the list of 
highways for Africa in the wiki.  Once you nudge them once or twice there is 
far less clean up to do when validating so ideally a tool that showed any new 
mapper who has mapped would be very nice but it isn't going to happen 
overnight.  More validators would be nice but they need to be tactful, have 
read the instructions and also have some knowledge and experience.  I recall 
one of my tiles was bruskly invalidated because I hadn't mapped something that 
was not required in the instructions.


People might not be reading instructions but they will have to read the 
contribute tab. Maybe something like a clearly visible message "please read the 
instructions before you start - if in doubt ask on the mailing list" could help 
here.


Another idea which comes to my mind: let contributors have a third choice for 
their task. Apart from "Unlock" and "Mark task as done" something which marks 
the task as done but calls for more-or-less immediate validation because the 
contributor wants feedback about the quality of his work. Such tiles would be 
displayed in a different colour and form a priority queue for validation.


This reduces the pressure of a direct interaction but offers newbies a feeling 
that they will not be left alone.


Regards

Michael



On 28 June 2015 at 07:35, Dale Kunce > wrote:


John and Susan I love this idea. The Missing Maps projects are generally
really good for new mappers. We could set up a couple of tasks outside a
mapathon just for this purpose.

Would you once a list of people you can contact in the task instructions.
These folks will also be the ones responsible for being the validates and
Mentors


On Sat, Jun 27, 2015, 9:21 PM Suzan Reed mailto:su...@suzanreed.com>> wrote:

John mentors me, and it's been extremely valuable to have him gently
mentioning problems.

Having a list of projects for new people where they can get some
mentoring as they learn to map would be exellent. Being isolated isn't
easy. Being on a team and working with other mappers encourages us to
do more mapping, and it's more interesting and dare I say, fun.

Cheers,
Suzan


On Jun 27, 2015, at 6:11 PM, john whelan wrote:

I normally keep an eye on about three or four projects and validate
any tiles that get marked done on those projects usually within a day
or so and often within an hour or two.

Working like this I find I can gently mention problems to newcomers
and strangely enough the projects get finished off.

Could some one think of a way to have a list of projects that are
validated in this way that newcomers can find easily so they can get a
bit of support and don't feel too isolated.  It would need commitment
from someone to validate a project rather than the project manager
adding it to the list.

Yes I understand that Maperthons are wonderful and looking over
someone's shoulder is useful but there are people who find getting to
Maperthons not so convenient and it would be nice to cater to them.

Thanks John
___






--
/Michael
(osm:michael63) /
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetm

Re: [HOT] validation

[john whelan]

The problem with email addresses are that when Nepal started up we had
several thousand new mappers in the first few days, if even 5% contacted
the email address the person gets swamped and burns out.

Maperthons, 1093 and 1094 I did quite a bit of validation on these, much of
the initial mapping was done in Maperthons and the quality was uneven.

Examples of projects where I've validated as things were completed are
http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/976
http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/686
http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/689

There are a couple of others that I validated and mapped on that are now
complete.  Currently I'm sitting on http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/1087#
http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/687 http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/688

The problem is how do you bring this type of project to a newcomer's
notice?  I happen to be a bit selective on the projects I sit on and
validate, generally speaking I prefer good imagery and avoid projects that
ask for buildings.  Yes a tile of 500 buildings looks wonderful but I work
with a small number of mappers and they aren't the most popular projects
with them.

If you put something in the task instructions then people have to read them
and there seems to be a tendency to just map first and read the
instructions afterwards.  In African villages highway=pedestrian isn't on
the list of highways for Africa in the wiki.  Once you nudge them once or
twice there is far less clean up to do when validating so ideally a tool
that showed any new mapper who has mapped would be very nice but it isn't
going to happen overnight.  More validators would be nice but they need to
be tactful, have read the instructions and also have some knowledge and
experience.  I recall one of my tiles was bruskly invalidated because I
hadn't mapped something that was not required in the instructions.

My initial reaction was quite strong, the exact words I thought were
perhaps not appropriate to repeat in the mailing list, and I can't help
feeling with a new mapper they might well have wandered off and done
something else.

So how can we do something?

Thanks John


On 28 June 2015 at 07:35, Dale Kunce  wrote:

> John and Susan I love this idea. The Missing Maps projects are generally
> really good for new mappers. We could set up a couple of tasks outside a
> mapathon just for this purpose.
>
> Would you once a list of people you can contact in the task instructions.
> These folks will also be the ones responsible for being the validates and
> Mentors
>
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2015, 9:21 PM Suzan Reed  wrote:
>
>> John mentors me, and it's been extremely valuable to have him gently
>> mentioning problems.
>>
>> Having a list of projects for new people where they can get some
>> mentoring as they learn to map would be exellent. Being isolated isn't
>> easy. Being on a team and working with other mappers encourages us to do
>> more mapping, and it's more interesting and dare I say, fun.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Suzan
>>
>>
>> On Jun 27, 2015, at 6:11 PM, john whelan wrote:
>>
>> I normally keep an eye on about three or four projects and validate any
>> tiles that get marked done on those projects usually within a day or so and
>> often within an hour or two.
>>
>> Working like this I find I can gently mention problems to newcomers and
>> strangely enough the projects get finished off.
>>
>> Could some one think of a way to have a list of projects that are
>> validated in this way that newcomers can find easily so they can get a bit
>> of support and don't feel too isolated.  It would need commitment from
>> someone to validate a project rather than the project manager adding it to
>> the list.
>>
>> Yes I understand that Maperthons are wonderful and looking over someone's
>> shoulder is useful but there are people who find getting to Maperthons not
>> so convenient and it would be nice to cater to them.
>>
>> Thanks John
>> ___
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
>> ___
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] validation

[Dale Kunce]

John and Susan I love this idea. The Missing Maps projects are generally
really good for new mappers. We could set up a couple of tasks outside a
mapathon just for this purpose.

Would you once a list of people you can contact in the task instructions.
These folks will also be the ones responsible for being the validates and
Mentors

On Sat, Jun 27, 2015, 9:21 PM Suzan Reed  wrote:

> John mentors me, and it's been extremely valuable to have him gently
> mentioning problems.
>
> Having a list of projects for new people where they can get some mentoring
> as they learn to map would be exellent. Being isolated isn't easy. Being on
> a team and working with other mappers encourages us to do more mapping, and
> it's more interesting and dare I say, fun.
>
> Cheers,
> Suzan
>
>
> On Jun 27, 2015, at 6:11 PM, john whelan wrote:
>
> I normally keep an eye on about three or four projects and validate any
> tiles that get marked done on those projects usually within a day or so and
> often within an hour or two.
>
> Working like this I find I can gently mention problems to newcomers and
> strangely enough the projects get finished off.
>
> Could some one think of a way to have a list of projects that are
> validated in this way that newcomers can find easily so they can get a bit
> of support and don't feel too isolated.  It would need commitment from
> someone to validate a project rather than the project manager adding it to
> the list.
>
> Yes I understand that Maperthons are wonderful and looking over someone's
> shoulder is useful but there are people who find getting to Maperthons not
> so convenient and it would be nice to cater to them.
>
> Thanks John
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] validation

[Suzan Reed]

John mentors me, and it's been extremely valuable to have him gently mentioning 
problems.

Having a list of projects for new people where they can get some mentoring as 
they learn to map would be exellent. Being isolated isn't easy. Being on a team 
and working with other mappers encourages us to do more mapping, and it's more 
interesting and dare I say, fun. 

Cheers, 
Suzan 


On Jun 27, 2015, at 6:11 PM, john whelan wrote:

I normally keep an eye on about three or four projects and validate any tiles 
that get marked done on those projects usually within a day or so and often 
within an hour or two.

Working like this I find I can gently mention problems to newcomers and 
strangely enough the projects get finished off.

Could some one think of a way to have a list of projects that are validated in 
this way that newcomers can find easily so they can get a bit of support and 
don't feel too isolated.  It would need commitment from someone to validate a 
project rather than the project manager adding it to the list.

Yes I understand that Maperthons are wonderful and looking over someone's 
shoulder is useful but there are people who find getting to Maperthons not so 
convenient and it would be nice to cater to them.

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


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

Re: [HOT] validation

[Daniel Specht]

There was one project that had validation instructions.  As someone that
does a lot of validation, I found them extremely helpful.  Also it's one
more tool to avoid inappropriate validation (see below).

On June 2 John Whelan wrote
>Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 21:27:12 -0400
>From: john whelan 
>To: "hot@openstreetmap.org" 
>Subject: [HOT] Validation
>Message-ID:

>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

>Could validators at least have the curtsy to read the project instructions
>before invalidating tiles because not all the buildings have been mapped on
>a project that does not require buildings to be mapped.

>I've brought it up in the Hot mailing group because although we talk about
>training for mappers some validators could do with some as well and whilst
>we are on the subject perhaps some suggestions on how to be tactful to
>volunteer mappers might not be amiss.

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

Re: [HOT] Validation tools

[Pierre Béland]

John, we would need to routinely query Overpass to query for new contributions 
for a specific bbox.
We should thinkf further about such validation process. In the meantime, it is 
certainly possible to export the TM, calculate the bbox and then make Overpass 
queries.
An other interesting feature with Overpass, it is possible to query for a 
particular contributor. We then have a complete view of his contribution. If he 
make constantly the same error, easier maybe to spot and correct.
  
Pierre 

  De : john whelan 
 À : "hot@openstreetmap.org"  
 Envoyé le : Dimanche 3 mai 2015 14h18
 Objet : [HOT] Validation tools
   
When I validate I may notice an area tagged as a building.  Occasionally I'll 
search the entire tile for more buildings by the same user and normally I'll 
find three or four areas tagged as buildings.

When I validate a project I try to validate tiles as soon or shortly after they 
are done and I've caught more than a few errors that way and gently nudged the 
mappers towards the accepted way of mapping.  However the typical tile has 
fourteen or fifteen different mappers contributing not just the one who marked 
it done.

However the really new inexperienced mappers don't mark a tile as done but 
these are the people I'd prefer to validate quickly to see they are mapping 
along the right lines.

Any suggestions please on how to pick them out and check what they've done?

Thanks John

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


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

Re: [HOT] Validation of 'own' tiles

[Pierre Béland]

thanks.
an other way to help is to contribute to the task manager development, adding, 
commenting issues.
https://github.com/hotosm/imagery-requests/issues

regard.
  
Pierre 

  De : spatialbits 
 À : hot@openstreetmap.org 
 Envoyé le : Jeudi 30 avril 2015 1h48
 Objet : Re: [HOT] Validation of 'own' tiles
   
Hi again,

last night I went through all the validated tiles in #1009 and had to
invalidate most of them. Problem is that very new contributor (no or
very few OSM edits, almost no HOT contributions so far) validate tiles.
I wrote messages to all of them and it seems that most of them are
thankful for guidance.
I know there is some discussion about this in some other thread
regarding improvements on the process. However I noticed there is no
information about the validation step in the instructions to a task,
while the functionality is available.

Maybe we could add a standard note on this including the link to the
wiki in the tasks' descriptions?

Best wishes,

Martin

On 29.04.2015 19:10, spatialbits wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I noticed in #1009 that some contributors validate tiles they marked as
> 'done' themselves.
> 
> Please be reminded that you should not validate your own work!
> 
> Some info about validation in [1].
> 
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data
> 
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> 

-- 
Martin Seiler
Fechenheimer Str. 8
60385 Frankfurt a. M.



___
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] Validation of 'own' tiles

[Arun Ganesh]

This is a software issue. Have filed it here:
https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/589


-- 
 Arun Ganesh
(planemad) 
 
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validation of 'own' tiles

[spatialbits]

Hi again,

last night I went through all the validated tiles in #1009 and had to
invalidate most of them. Problem is that very new contributor (no or
very few OSM edits, almost no HOT contributions so far) validate tiles.
I wrote messages to all of them and it seems that most of them are
thankful for guidance.
I know there is some discussion about this in some other thread
regarding improvements on the process. However I noticed there is no
information about the validation step in the instructions to a task,
while the functionality is available.

Maybe we could add a standard note on this including the link to the
wiki in the tasks' descriptions?

Best wishes,

Martin

On 29.04.2015 19:10, spatialbits wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I noticed in #1009 that some contributors validate tiles they marked as
> 'done' themselves.
> 
> Please be reminded that you should not validate your own work!
> 
> Some info about validation in [1].
> 
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data
> 
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> 

-- 
Martin Seiler
Fechenheimer Str. 8
60385 Frankfurt a. M.

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

Re: [HOT] Validation

[althio]

[continued... sorry for the previous post without meaningful content]

> If some people want a deeper dive into Tasking Manager, here are a few
> pointers to the GitHub repository for improvements and bug tracking system.
>

"Blake Girardot"  wrote:
> There are probably some programmatic things to improve the situation that
could be done:
> 1. Dialog box on marking "Done" that asks "Are you sure you have mapped
everything in the 'Entities to map' field?"

Related in GitHub: add a popup/checklist of items to map and items to review

https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/421
This issue is open for comments and suggestions.



> I tend to almost never invalidate a square unless it is obvious that
someone clicked "done" thinking that meant they were just "done" looking at
it

Related in Github: my long proposal to modify labels ("Done" is misleading,
"Invalidate" is unpleasant), add a 2-click process to mark (checkbox and
button) and hide invalidated status from the GUI for normal users (+ more
proposals for wording, colors, icons...)

https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/484
mockup https://moqups.com/althio.fo...@gmail.com/3LXQtQ9I
This issue is open for comments and suggestions.

This is to be discussed but I think "invalidate" could be hidden on the map
or changed to something more neutral like "re-open".




Vao Matua  wrote:
> A suggestion for the HOT Tasking Manager Stats page would be to add the
number of tiles an individual mapper Validates.

See this report from Nick:
https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/545
and a previous one about contributing without marking as done
https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/368
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validation

[althio]

If some people want a deeper dive into Tasking Manager, here are a few
pointers to the GitHub repository for improvements and bug tracking system.

"Blake Girardot"  wrote:
 Nick, Blake & althio, Good practical advice.
I think it is important to remember that there are humans on either side of
the validation.
There have been times when I added a few features and then validated, other
times I start adding and realize that quite a bit had been missed and then
I'm kind of stuck and just finish it off.  Hopefully I'm not leaving a
similar trail for others to clean up.

A suggestion for the HOT Tasking Manager Stats page would be to add the
number of tiles an individual mapper Validates.

As John says "we have a lot of tiles to map".

Map on

Emmor
(Palolo)

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 5:59 AM, althio  wrote:

> My personal views is that statuses done/validated/invalidated should be
> related to progress and quality of the current state of mapping.
> We should not use that to give feedback or give implicitly a notation to
> previous mappers.
> Use comments (with @-mentions) for feedback.
> A "notation" of mappers is a very complex and different problem.
>
>
> Pragmatic / Real situation answers
>
> Empty tile or most work not done: invalidated, short comment.
>
> A bit of work left to do ie. a few missing elements or tagging errors. I
> would do corrections to bring the mapping standard up to required level, I
> would add detailed comment to provide feedback or guidance. If I am
> confident enough with the previous work and my minor edits, I validate
> since the tile is now OK. Otherwise I leave it to another reviewer.
>
> In between? It depends on the mood and available time obviously and the
> limits between cases are fuzzy.
> If I have too little time or it is too much corrections I would go for the
> comments only with @-mentions, most of the time with no further
> validation/invalidation. If I avoid invalidation I hope the comment is
> enough for track record and bring attention to previous and potential
> mappers. This is taking care of community over quality and I appreciate
> that opinions may differ.
>
>
> john whelan  wrote:
>
>>
>> Question at what point should I invalidate?  The question arises when
>> perhaps I've added a dozen settlements and half a dozen highways, I'm
>> fairly experienced so fairly comfortable the work is OK after I've added in
>> the validation but there is the question that I've added a dozen
>> settlements and no one else will be validating.
>>
>> I'm looking more for pragmatic answers more than anything else, there is
>> a concern that if I invalidate a tile it may demotivate a mapper and at the
>> moment we have a lot of tiles to map.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validation

[althio]

> 2. Maybe reverse what we have now: No mail gets sent when something is
invalidated and mail gets sent when something is validated. I don't know
how many people come back to map if their task square gets invalidated
anyway, especially if it is weeks or months later so we might not be
gaining anything by sending the invalidated notice and just discouraging
people.
>
> I think we would gain a lot more if people got notices of the good job
they did instead.
>
> And then we wouldn't feel bad to invalidate a task square so it can get
the attention it needs and we can move on to validate more tasks.
>
> That might be a good simple start, just stop sending the 'invalidated'
notices.

 Your point about no more notifications of invalidated tiles is quite
thought provoking Blake.
My first instinct would be to disagree because I like to know when my tiles
get invalidated. It can happen that some reviewers ask for more mapping
than the instructions (in particular important buildings vs all buildings).
Any time the instructions are unclear it is getting worse.
Some personal examples:
http:// tasks.hotosm.org
/project/751#task/154

http:// tasks.hotosm.org
/project/765#task/163

http:// tasks.hotosm.org
/project/767#task/261

http:// tasks.hotosm.org
/project/767#task/207


Anyway any default behavior for notifications could be overridden by
specific @-mentions from any comments/validation/invalidation.

Notification for validated is positive feedback.
Notification for invalidated is negative feedback, but comment is
compulsory.
Notification for invalidated with comment (automatic or @-mention) is
constructive feedback.
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Vao Matua]

Nick, Blake & althio, Good practical advice.
I think it is important to remember that there are humans on either side of
the validation.
There have been times when I added a few features and then validated, other
times I start adding and realize that quite a bit had been missed and then
I'm kind of stuck and just finish it off.  Hopefully I'm not leaving a
similar trail for others to clean up.

A suggestion for the HOT Tasking Manager Stats page would be to add the
number of tiles an individual mapper Validates.

As John says "we have a lot of tiles to map".

Map on

Emmor
(Palolo)

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 5:59 AM, althio  wrote:

> My personal views is that statuses done/validated/invalidated should be
> related to progress and quality of the current state of mapping.
> We should not use that to give feedback or give implicitly a notation to
> previous mappers.
> Use comments (with @-mentions) for feedback.
> A "notation" of mappers is a very complex and different problem.
>
>
> Pragmatic / Real situation answers
>
> Empty tile or most work not done: invalidated, short comment.
>
> A bit of work left to do ie. a few missing elements or tagging errors. I
> would do corrections to bring the mapping standard up to required level, I
> would add detailed comment to provide feedback or guidance. If I am
> confident enough with the previous work and my minor edits, I validate
> since the tile is now OK. Otherwise I leave it to another reviewer.
>
> In between? It depends on the mood and available time obviously and the
> limits between cases are fuzzy.
> If I have too little time or it is too much corrections I would go for the
> comments only with @-mentions, most of the time with no further
> validation/invalidation. If I avoid invalidation I hope the comment is
> enough for track record and bring attention to previous and potential
> mappers. This is taking care of community over quality and I appreciate
> that opinions may differ.
>
>
> john whelan  wrote:
>
>>
>> Question at what point should I invalidate?  The question arises when
>> perhaps I've added a dozen settlements and half a dozen highways, I'm
>> fairly experienced so fairly comfortable the work is OK after I've added in
>> the validation but there is the question that I've added a dozen
>> settlements and no one else will be validating.
>>
>> I'm looking more for pragmatic answers more than anything else, there is
>> a concern that if I invalidate a tile it may demotivate a mapper and at the
>> moment we have a lot of tiles to map.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validation

[althio]

My personal views is that statuses done/validated/invalidated should be
related to progress and quality of the current state of mapping.
We should not use that to give feedback or give implicitly a notation to
previous mappers.
Use comments (with @-mentions) for feedback.
A "notation" of mappers is a very complex and different problem.


Pragmatic / Real situation answers

Empty tile or most work not done: invalidated, short comment.

A bit of work left to do ie. a few missing elements or tagging errors. I
would do corrections to bring the mapping standard up to required level, I
would add detailed comment to provide feedback or guidance. If I am
confident enough with the previous work and my minor edits, I validate
since the tile is now OK. Otherwise I leave it to another reviewer.

In between? It depends on the mood and available time obviously and the
limits between cases are fuzzy.
If I have too little time or it is too much corrections I would go for the
comments only with @-mentions, most of the time with no further
validation/invalidation. If I avoid invalidation I hope the comment is
enough for track record and bring attention to previous and potential
mappers. This is taking care of community over quality and I appreciate
that opinions may differ.


john whelan  wrote:

>
> Question at what point should I invalidate?  The question arises when
> perhaps I've added a dozen settlements and half a dozen highways, I'm
> fairly experienced so fairly comfortable the work is OK after I've added in
> the validation but there is the question that I've added a dozen
> settlements and no one else will be validating.
>
> I'm looking more for pragmatic answers more than anything else, there is a
> concern that if I invalidate a tile it may demotivate a mapper and at the
> moment we have a lot of tiles to map.
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheerio John
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validation

[john whelan]

So it sounds like by validating we are giving some positive feedback and
makes it seem that the mapping efforts aren't for naught and ideally we
should be in a position to validate within a day or two of the mapping to
keep a bit of motivation up.

I have noticed that in the stats we say xyz has done twenty three tiles but
in reality each tile has been worked on by three or four different people
in some ways xyz has only signed off on it.

Anyway I'd better go and validate a few more on the tasks I'm working on.

Thanks John

On 16 February 2015 at 00:55, Blake Girardot  wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> It is a difficult question you ask as I feel the same way you and Nick do,
> I really don't want to invalidate squares to avoid discouraging people.
>
> I tend to almost never invalidate a square unless it is obvious that
> someone clicked "done" thinking that meant they were just "done" looking at
> it.
>
> So, depending on how much mapping there is to do I usually:
>
> Just do the mapping if it is less than 15 mins worth and make sure to let
> the person who marked it done thank you for the mapping, there was a bit
> more to do so I finished it up. I will also often just map it even if it is
> longer than 15 mins but I end up validating a lot less if that is the case
> on a lot of squares.
>
> Unlock a task square and then just directly message the person and ask
> them if they could map a bit more. I only do this if we are talking a
> square completed in the past day or two.
>
> Unlock the task square and find another one to hopefully validate quicker
> if my time is limited. I know this is a terrible solution.
>
> There are probably some programmatic things to improve the situation that
> could be done:
>
> 1. Dialog box on marking "Done" that asks "Are you sure you have mapped
> everything in the 'Entities to map' field?"
>
> 2. Maybe reverse what we have now: No mail gets sent when something is
> invalidated and mail gets sent when something is validated. I don't know
> how many people come back to map if their task square gets invalidated
> anyway, especially if it is weeks or months later so we might not be
> gaining anything by sending the invalidated notice and just discouraging
> people.
>
> I think we would gain a lot more if people got notices of the good job
> they did instead.
>
> And then we wouldn't feel bad to invalidate a task square so it can get
> the attention it needs and we can move on to validate more tasks.
>
> That might be a good simple start, just stop sending the 'invalidated'
> notices.
>
> Thank you for bringing it up, the validation process is tricky and subtle.
>
> Cheers,
> Blake
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2/16/2015 12:55 AM, john whelan wrote:
>
>> Mapping in Africa from satellite images I find I'm adding perhaps half a
>> dozen settlements when I validate, they're quite quick and easy to do.
>> Some are huts and are not quite so easy to spot.
>>
>> Question at what point should I invalidate?  The question arises when
>> perhaps I've added a dozen settlements and half a dozen highways, I'm
>> fairly experienced so fairly comfortable the work is OK after I've added
>> in the validation but there is the question that I've added a dozen
>> settlements and no one else will be validating.
>>
>> I'm looking more for pragmatic answers more than anything else, there is
>> a concern that if I invalidate a tile it may demotivate a mapper and at
>> the moment we have a lot of tiles to map.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>>
>> ___
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Blake Girardot]

Hi John,

It is a difficult question you ask as I feel the same way you and Nick 
do, I really don't want to invalidate squares to avoid discouraging people.


I tend to almost never invalidate a square unless it is obvious that 
someone clicked "done" thinking that meant they were just "done" looking 
at it.


So, depending on how much mapping there is to do I usually:

Just do the mapping if it is less than 15 mins worth and make sure to 
let the person who marked it done thank you for the mapping, there was a 
bit more to do so I finished it up. I will also often just map it even 
if it is longer than 15 mins but I end up validating a lot less if that 
is the case on a lot of squares.


Unlock a task square and then just directly message the person and ask 
them if they could map a bit more. I only do this if we are talking a 
square completed in the past day or two.


Unlock the task square and find another one to hopefully validate 
quicker if my time is limited. I know this is a terrible solution.


There are probably some programmatic things to improve the situation 
that could be done:


1. Dialog box on marking "Done" that asks "Are you sure you have mapped 
everything in the 'Entities to map' field?"


2. Maybe reverse what we have now: No mail gets sent when something is 
invalidated and mail gets sent when something is validated. I don't know 
how many people come back to map if their task square gets invalidated 
anyway, especially if it is weeks or months later so we might not be 
gaining anything by sending the invalidated notice and just discouraging 
people.


I think we would gain a lot more if people got notices of the good job 
they did instead.


And then we wouldn't feel bad to invalidate a task square so it can get 
the attention it needs and we can move on to validate more tasks.


That might be a good simple start, just stop sending the 'invalidated' 
notices.


Thank you for bringing it up, the validation process is tricky and subtle.

Cheers,
Blake




On 2/16/2015 12:55 AM, john whelan wrote:

Mapping in Africa from satellite images I find I'm adding perhaps half a
dozen settlements when I validate, they're quite quick and easy to do.
Some are huts and are not quite so easy to spot.

Question at what point should I invalidate?  The question arises when
perhaps I've added a dozen settlements and half a dozen highways, I'm
fairly experienced so fairly comfortable the work is OK after I've added
in the validation but there is the question that I've added a dozen
settlements and no one else will be validating.

I'm looking more for pragmatic answers more than anything else, there is
a concern that if I invalidate a tile it may demotivate a mapper and at
the moment we have a lot of tiles to map.

Thanks

Cheerio John


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



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

Re: [HOT] Validation

[Nick Allen]

John,

I tend to vary it a bit - My normal comment in the box is something like
'imagery was probably slow to load which is why they were missed', but then
I often add a link to something like
http://learnosm.org/en/coordination/remote/#buildings-compounds-amp-barriers
and a casual comment about round huts being explained there, just in case
the mapper isn't recognising them.

Sometimes I'm quite happy to do a lot of missed mapping on the basis that
it can be quite relaxing & pleasant to do so!  If I do add the missing
bits, I normally still add the link & send the message just in case there
is a learning point. When I'm validating for a mapathon I try to actually
see the mapper & get them to add the missing bits.

Although quality control is important, helping each other is more
important. I don't like to see squares invalidated for little reason as it
tends to lead to ill feeling.

I only ever invalidate if there is a lot missing though - we can all miss a
couple of buildings on occasion. I have genuinely had imagery fail to load
properly, so I missed an entire area at one point, and only picked up on it
when working on the adjoining square & realising there had to be something
I had missed.

Keep up the good work.

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)

On 15 February 2015 at 23:55, john whelan  wrote:

> Mapping in Africa from satellite images I find I'm adding perhaps half a
> dozen settlements when I validate, they're quite quick and easy to do.
> Some are huts and are not quite so easy to spot.
>
> Question at what point should I invalidate?  The question arises when
> perhaps I've added a dozen settlements and half a dozen highways, I'm
> fairly experienced so fairly comfortable the work is OK after I've added in
> the validation but there is the question that I've added a dozen
> settlements and no one else will be validating.
>
> I'm looking more for pragmatic answers more than anything else, there is a
> concern that if I invalidate a tile it may demotivate a mapper and at the
> moment we have a lot of tiles to map.
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheerio John
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Validation queries

[Nick Allen]

Hi Severin.

4kb limit hence me cropping the message.

I could start with http://tasks.hotosm.org/job/371 (CAR, Bossangoa) - I
wasn't involved in mapping it.

But I'm happy to start anywhere else if you prefer.

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] Validation queries

[Pierre Béland]

I Theodin,

It is true that every new crisis mobilizes the contributors. At the same time, 
there is some work left to contribute in other places. The Philippines crisis 
revealed how our community is growing and have the capacity to respond rapidly 
to such major crisis. This was after Democratic Republic of Congo, Mali 
Activations and various other projects the HOT and OSM community responded to 
(ie. Madagascar, Indonesia, Philiipines other then Haiyan, North India, etc).  
If we add all the projects in 2013, the picture shows a significant progress in 
the response to the various crisis.

At the same time, this is true that we should take care the other crisis were 
the media spotlights are not. Local communities, university students could take 
the initiative to organize groups and take care of various other areas that 
need some care with mapping, validation, road classification, etc.

I invite the contributors to look at the Task Manager jobs for South Sudan and 
Central African Republic where the humanitarians need some support from the 
mapping community.  In Norh of Mal, there is reconstruction after last year 
civil war and some TM jobs need some care since there are still large areas not 
covered. Democratic Republic of Congo is an other area where we plan to add 
some mapping while new images will come. 




 
Pierre 




 De : Theodin 
À : hot@openstreetmap.org 
Envoyé le : Mercredi 15 janvier 2014 5h21
Objet : Re: [HOT] Validation queries
 


Hi Severin and all others,

Although I practically stopped working on OSM in CAR, I am still
following the list and read your Wiki-page-style how-to with
interest (reading it I realised I didnt make any of the errors you
mentioned which is nice :) ). I hope to be able to contribute more
in the coming months. Its nice to see so many people emergency-map
for OSM (Yolanda etc), and I hope some will start to work on other
areas as well which are hit badly by crises of a not-so-obvious
nature.

Regards, 
Simeon


Am 14.01.2014 19:24, schrieb Severin MENARD:

Hi Nick,
>
>
>Thank you for your email. My answers inline.
> 
>Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:48:00 +
>>From: Nick Allen 
>>To: HOT@openstreetmap.org
>>Subject: [HOT] Validation queries
>>Message-ID: <52d29d10.6010...@gmail.com>
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1";
  Format="flowed"
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>>Would you like me to join in with the validation process?
  I am
>>experienced in mapping OSM, but am fairly new to regularly
  mapping HOT
>>projects.
>>
>Would be great! Thanks for the proposition! Indeed you have contributed a lot 
>in OSM. Mapping HOT projects is not very complicated, as you saw with the 
>Highway_Tag_Africa, it is less detailed then in developed countries, at least 
>regarding remote mapping. Maybe the difficulty is when you do not know how 
>those contexts look like. A goo way to compensate this is to look for videos 
>posted on Youtube (examples here), especially the ones taken along road or 
>streets. This is how you figure out if properties enclosures are walls, fences 
>or hedges, what is often a cultural feature. Ah, just saw you mapped some wall 
>enclosures (eg here). They actually are buildings (houses) under construction. 
>It is frequent in developing countries that such works last a long time or 
>even be abandoned. 
>
>>I'm responsible for some of the mapping in
>>http://tasks.hotosm.org/job/72, as well as trying to change some of the
>>more obvious 'highway=track to highway=residential or
  unclassified etc..
>>or it may be easier to check what I've done using my OSM
  profile
>>http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy/history#map=13/4.4168/18.4936&layers=N
>>
>>How much validation is actually needed / done? Is it a
  proportion of the
>>whole task, or just until you are confident that, all
  things considered,
>>the task is fulfilled? You're never going to get 100% as
  some things
>>boil down to opinion about what the images actually are
  of, but the vast
>>proportion is pretty obvious.
>>
>This is something that still needs to be settled and documented. I would say a 
>validation is about both identifying mistakes/mapping lacks and 
>standarzation/consolidation and has 2 or three steps, related to scale:
>1. At neighborhood scale, check notably if:
>   * buildings are missing. Sometimes it happens and if actually it 
> represents a consequent number of building over a TM task, it can be 
> invalidated
>   * buildings are correctly traced. Hopefully it is not frequent, but 
> sometimes mappers made really coarse outline

Re: [HOT] Validation queries

[Theodin]

Hi Severin and all others,

Although I practically stopped working on OSM in CAR, I am still following the 
list and read your
Wiki-page-style how-to with interest (reading it I realised I didnt make any of 
the errors you
mentioned which is nice :) ). I hope to be able to contribute more in the 
coming months. Its nice to
see so many people emergency-map for OSM (Yolanda etc), and I hope some will 
start to work on other
areas as well which are hit badly by crises of a not-so-obvious nature.

Regards,
Simeon

Am 14.01.2014 19:24, schrieb Severin MENARD:
> Hi Nick,
>
> Thank you for your email. My answers inline.
>  
>
> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:48:00 +
> From: Nick Allen  >
> To: HOT@openstreetmap.org 
> Subject: [HOT] Validation queries
> Message-ID: <52d29d10.6010...@gmail.com 
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>
> Hi,
>
> Would you like me to join in with the validation process? I am
> experienced in mapping OSM, but am fairly new to regularly mapping HOT
> projects.
>
> Would be great! Thanks for the proposition! Indeed you have contributed a lot 
> in OSM. Mapping HOT
> projects is not very complicated, as you saw with the Highway_Tag_Africa
> , it is less detailed 
> then in developed
> countries, at least regarding remote mapping. Maybe the difficulty is when 
> you do not know how
> those contexts look like. A goo way to compensate this is to look for videos 
> posted on Youtube
> (examples here ), 
> especially the ones
> taken along road or streets. This is how you figure out if properties 
> enclosures are walls, fences
> or hedges, what is often a cultural feature. Ah, just saw you mapped some 
> wall enclosures (eg here
> ). They 
> actually are buildings
> (houses) under construction. It is frequent in developing countries that such 
> works last a long
> time or even be abandoned. 
>
>
> I'm responsible for some of the mapping in
> http://tasks.hotosm.org/job/72, as well as trying to change some of the
> more obvious 'highway=track to highway=residential or unclassified etc..
> or it may be easier to check what I've done using my OSM profile
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy/history#map=13/4.4168/18.4936&layers=N
>
> How much validation is actually needed / done? Is it a proportion of the
> whole task, or just until you are confident that, all things considered,
> the task is fulfilled? You're never going to get 100% as some things
> boil down to opinion about what the images actually are of, but the vast
> proportion is pretty obvious.
>
> This is something that still needs to be settled and documented. I would say 
> a validation is about
> both identifying mistakes/mapping lacks and standarzation/consolidation and 
> has 2 or three steps,
> related to scale:
> 1. At neighborhood scale, check notably if:
>
>   * buildings are missing. Sometimes it happens and if actually it represents 
> a consequent number
> of building over a TM task, it can be invalidated
>   * buildings are correctly traced. Hopefully it is not frequent, but 
> sometimes mappers made
> really coarse outlines that do not respect either the buildings 
> proportions or angle. More
> frequent are mappers that do not know how to square the buildings. In 
> this case, after having
> checked what is their preferred editor, I generally send a message to 
> their OSM message box to
> give them the tip to do it
>   * highway tags are correct. This is what you described. Some mappers put 
> tracks wherever it is
> not a main road considering it is not paved, but this is not a meaningful 
> criteria in these
> developing countries considering 99% of roads are unpaved. 
>   * road geometry. Some mappers do not put enough details and other too much 
> (eg a node every 10
> or 20 m even if the road is straight). First case is quickly corrected 
> with the (magical)
> Improve Way Accuracy mode in JOSM; second case requires deleting extra 
> nodes when they
> actually make weave a straight road. 
>   * start/end of roads. Some mappers are experts of giant snake roads or loop 
> roads, Requires to
> pass the mouse over the streets to see their extent and cut them where it 
> makes sense. On the
> contrary, some streets or roads are sawed without any reason (same tags 
> for all the sections)
>   * general issues of connections between objects. Some that should be 
> connected and those that
> should not. Requires both Validator and also eye control
>
>  2. at the town or city scale, it is quite related to the road network and 
> its main highways.
> Having a larger view  to identi