Bryce - this is an interesting review, thanks for sharing. On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Martijn van Exel <m...@rtijn.org> wrote:
> As for Scout, I talked about this in my diary entry > <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mvexel/diary/28208> some time ago - > not all of these are going to be useful and there is going to be noise. > We're looking at improving the quality of the notes that make it through - > which is already a tiny, tiny fraction the notes we get internally. Only > through making mistakes do we learn how to get it right - not by not doing > it in the first place. I would say it's a stretch to call this a 'huge > waste' of our time - as I write this there are only a little over 100 notes > posted on OSM through our Scout users. > For the same reason we don't just open a note for map feedback we get from the feedback button on Mapbox maps. Only about ~~1% of all feedback we receive winds up as a note on OpenStreetMap and that only happens after the feedback has been reviewed manually. In general I think it should be easier, not harder, to create notes and > Ian's onosm is a good example of how to accomplish that. Adding artificial > friction makes no sense to me. Less notes should not be an objective, > smarter ways to look at them and process them should. > I agree, simplicity rules. Some ideas to manage the overkill, not all of this is necessarily stuff that needs to be built into osm.org: - An interface for reviewing notes fast - this would allow for allowing some of us to triage notes. E. g. close them or classify them as "needs local knowledge" / "needs armchair mapping". - A friendly walk through for the first time user. "Hey, using notes for the first time?" Like we iD does this. Goal: set expectations of what notes are for. - Some ways of dealing with spam (would be useful to quantify some of the issues you found for this)
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk