*Regards,* *Hans*
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:01 PM, SomeoneElse <li...@atownsend.org.uk> wrote: > On 06/01/2015 01:25, Michał Brzozowski wrote: > >> * Software for monitoring OSM changes is still very rudimentary. I >> wanna be the f**king NSA. It's incredibly hard to check newbies' work >> quickly (eg. you have to load every changeset separately into OSMHV). >> > > I'm not sure that it is "incredibly hard" - I rarely need to throw new > users' changesets at osmhv - that usually gets saved for the wide > changesets of people making things match JOSM's presets. It's usually > pretty easy to categorise new users into "adding new things; no problems", > "adding things OK but haven't quite grasped $some_concept (like joining > roads at nodes)" or "Oh dear they're really struggling". > > > * Why do these newbies make so many mistakes? >> > > Because it's difficult, dammit! When I started mapping there was a large > area of white space for several miles around my house - not even the roads > were mapped. It took a long time to get the hang of things, but while I > was doing it there were no local mappers breathing down my neck saying that > I was "tagging for the renderer" or similar. > > We have to give new mappers the time to get the hang of things, and offer > help when required, but constructively and not just saying "your're doing > it wrong". One of the sad things about OSM is that many people are willing > to fix the _data_ but not to fix the _people_ - if you look at the changset > history anywhere you'll often see quite wide changesets with descriptions > such as "fix typo" - but rarely are the people making these changes going > back to the original mappers explaining the best way to map a certain > feature. I think the reason most long time mappers don't communicate the mistake the was made to new mapper s is the fact that where afraid of getting into a long drawn out conversation with them or it turning into a disagreement and end ing up nowhere. Just two frustrated mappers. I would like to point out a case in point. There's a mapper whose page a ran across that said "All emails to me will immediately be deleted without being read."Now how do we communicate when we have mappers who feel that way in the community It's hard. > > > The documentation is a >> mess, editor presets are incomplete (whereas they should include all >> approved and other widely used features) >> >> > Sometimes we forget that real life is complicated. It's not a simple case > of "tag X or tag Y" - something might be a pub, or a restaurant, or > somewhere in between, and sometimes what might be the best category can > change. > > We saw it recently where well-meaning people tried to mechanically change > "wood=deciduous" to "leaf_type=broadleaved" (most deciduous trees in the UK > are broad_leaved, though some aren't - for example > http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/40614704 ). At the weekend I went and > had a look at this area: > > http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/6SY > > and it turns out that things are _much_ more complicated than how it is > currently mapped (by me!) suggests. There are at least four groups of > "planting type" there (old-growth broadleaved deciduous on the SSSI, > planted-for-forestry pine in neat rows, some "odds and sods" mixed > deciduous between the pine plantings, and some areas that are virtually > heathland). No amount of "remotely changing tag X to tag Y" will capture > that detail - you need to go there and have a look. > > However, if a new mapper arrives at an area like this part of Clipstone > Forest but blank and maps it all just as "some sort of woodland", perhaps > even very roughly to start with, they've still made the map better than it > was before. > > Sometimes we forget that we were all new mappers once. > > Cheers, > > Andy > > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
