On 31.12.16 00:30, john whelan wrote:
There has been some recent traffic about new users and the occasional
problems they cause. The recent traffic was about Pokemon. In HOT in
theory new users work is validated. In practise its only when a tile
is completed and even then most tiles aren't c
On Fri, 30 Dec 2016 18:30:06 -0500
john whelan wrote:
>
> In HOT in theory new users work is validated.
> In practise its only when a tile is completed
> and even then most tiles aren't checked.
Thank you... I'm sincerly glad you recognize this issue in HOT
contributions: from my window (mostly S
Hi John,
You can try one of the several tools proposed by Pascal Neis, that
could fulfill part of your ideas.
In particular see:
http://neis-one.org/2016/01/suspicious-osm/
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
and other tools of interest at:
http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/
Cheers,
--
There has been some recent traffic about new users and the occasional
problems they cause. The recent traffic was about Pokemon. In HOT in
theory new users work is validated. In practise its only when a tile is
completed and even then most tiles aren't checked.
Somewhere the number of edits and
On mán 22.ágú 2016 11:40, Simon Poole wrote:
>
> Am 22.08.2016 um 01:59 schrieb Svavar Kjarrval:
>> There are also online QA tools which display certain types of errors,
> "notifications that data that may be erroneous" please, not "errors".
> The false positive rate of all such tool tends to rathe
On 22/08/2016 12:40, Simon Poole wrote:
"notifications that data that may be erroneous" please, not "errors".
The false positive rate of all such tool tends to rather high and
believing that the tool is right without checking is a sure way to break
a lot of data.
Simon
Indeed. The likes of
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 22 ago 2016, alle ore 13:40, Simon Poole ha
> scritto:
>
> "notifications that data that may be erroneous" please, not "errors".
> The false positive rate of all such tool tends to rather high and
> believing that the tool is right without checking is a sure way
On 22/08/2016 12:40, john whelan wrote:
Now the idea of something that picks up a POI such as a shop for
review every x months is interesting and its not impossible to build a
suitable tool. I wonder who I can chat to.
There was a web-based thing that did exactly that (can't remember where,
Am 22.08.2016 um 01:59 schrieb Svavar Kjarrval:
> There are also online QA tools which display certain types of errors,
"notifications that data that may be erroneous" please, not "errors".
The false positive rate of all such tool tends to rather high and
believing that the tool is right without
Now the idea of something that picks up a POI such as a shop for review
every x months is interesting and its not impossible to build a suitable
tool. I wonder who I can chat to.
Thanks John
On 22 August 2016 at 06:56, Svavar Kjarrval wrote:
> I agree the online tools can't help (much) regardi
I agree the online tools can't help (much) regarding spelling errors...
yet. A similar error when some stores in a chain have shop=yes and the
others have a more detailed tag (or even different tags). That being
said, I too am interested in data quality enhancements, especially when
it comes to inf
Whilst the on line tools are useful being able to review the tags in a
spreadsheet I found very useful. The online tools aren't quite so good at
picking up four different ways that a car rental company's name has been
spelt. The other part is to do with local knowledge. Often knowing the
area gi
There are also online QA tools which display certain types of errors,
for example Osmose [1] and Keep right [2]. The users who don't have much
computer memory installed could use those types of sites instead.
[1] http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/
[2] http://keepright.at/
- Svavar Kjarrval
O
Yes I know we shouldn’t but just sometimes it’s nice to think about the
people who use the maps. Can we make life a little easier for them?
This post is aimed purely at 64 bit Windows users. The tools may work on
other operating systems but I haven’t tried them. There are other tools
around.
T
On 2 May 2015 at 23:05, Colin Smale wrote:
> On 2015-05-02 23:28, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> We collect observations.
>>
>
> ...
>
> There is
>> no way for the mapper on the ground to know that the name on the
>> building "should" be something else.
>>
>
> I think that sounds rather disingenuous.
On 2015-05-02 23:28, Frederik Ramm wrote:
We collect observations.
...
There is
no way for the mapper on the ground to know that the name on the
building "should" be something else.
I think that sounds rather disingenuous. We humans are perfectly capable
of correctly interpreting data whi
16 matches
Mail list logo
