Nick Whitelegg wrote:
>I ran a mapping party in Fareham, Hampshire, UK in which three newbies >came, back at the start of November. These three newbies, who were >reasonably adept at using computers but not "geeks", if you get what I >mean, were able to successfully use JOSM - something harder than Potlatch, >perhaps - to add street names to unnamed streets in Fareham. So I'm not >sure that either editor is that hard to use given a proper >demonstration. > >Nick Nick, The users that you mention as an example, have already made an initial commitment to OSM by even being at a mapping party. The people I'm thinking of are those who haven't had, nor are likely to have the opportunity for that type of initial experience. In the US, propably 90%+ of the area (although granted not 90% of the mappable objects) are in areas where there are no active user organizations, or possibly any current active mappers. Potential newbies need to see something that will tweak their interest, and that they can interact with from a cold start, with no human assistance, probably based on a defect/omission that they have seen in OSM or one of the commercial maps. I'm not sure if anyone is thinking along the lines of allowing a user to immediately make changes, without signing up for an account. There are pros and cons to that. I'm neutral on the issue, as long as proper precautions are taken. If the capability to make changes without an account were provided, then I certainy agree that the edits should be limited to only adding POIs and street names. Even changing names shouldn't be allowed, since that opens the vandalism can of worms much more. And, if the changes are anonimous (i.e., without an account), they should include a unique "newbie" user tag, so that any time an experienced user wants to take a look at the newbie changes to see if a vandal has been at work, it will be easy to do. And, reversion of changes under that tag, should require minimum coordination. If an account is required, then I think providing something like a "dumbed down" Potlatch would be more appropriate. I really do believe that a simple clean interface to making changes at "the next level", whatever that is, would be appropriate. Obviously the allowed features list is debatable. I would like to see a little more than Roy wants, but significantly less than full Potlatch. I'm sure there are many different opinions, all with some level of validity. And, I think I agree with Roy to some extent, in that it would be better to err on the lower capability side than the higher to start with. If experience shows that the initial level of capabability is not leading to significant mapping problems, and the newbies think it is too restrictive, then adding a considered increment in capability would be merited. That is one advantage of basing the limited editor on a full fledged editor. It would be easier to shift capability from one level to the other, in either direction. I have to admit that I only took a cursory look at an early Potlatch 2 development, but will certainly give it another look. I typically use JOSM. Probably because I just feel more confortable working off line, and the variety of plug-ins attracts me. But, I do use Potlatch occasionally for doing the quick simple things that are rarely much more than I think appropriate for the "intermediate newbie". With some optional interactive instructions ("you have placed that way node on or near another way, should they be connected?"). I think Potlatch's templates could easily be used in a restrictive manner that only allows a limited selectable subset of attributes with no free text entry, except for names. Yes, I agree with whoever suggested it (Liz?) that a wiki for allowed newbie features and other design suggestions would be a great idea. There have been some good ideas thrown out, and it's too hard to capture and organize them in talk. (Hmm. My talk messages continue to be way too long!) -- Randy _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk