On 3/19/2020 3:17 PM, Mikel Maron wrote:
> How would a mapper performing imports via RapiD comply with the
import guidelines?
By complying with the guidelines before setting up an import process
that leveraged RapiD for conflation.
That doesn't sound so bad to me, pending further details.
But it's not the first thing that leaps to mind when reading the blog
post, which claims that RapiD will allow imports by normal users who
find the traditional import process "too onerous." Current RapiD
workflow (in my experience) is "AI thinks a road/building is here and
looks like this. If you agree, click to add it." Changing the source
from AI-enhanced satellite imagery to "authoritative dataset" and I
picture a similar process: "Data Authority X thinks Y is here. If you
agree, click to add it." You can see how this sounds like an end-run
around the import guidelines, because it's performing an import without
a dedicated import account.
A good conflation tool would process a prospective dataset pre-import,
comparing OSM data against one or more external data sources and
assisting with other forms of data cleanup. If RapiD had a mode like
this, which allowed crowdsourced conflation instead of live map editing,
that could be useful. The resulting (hopefully improved) dataset could
then be considered as a candidate for an import according to the
standard import guidelines. But offhand I imagine casual users would be
confused if the same piece of software is sometimes a live map editor,
and sometimes a pre-import conflation tool.
Jason
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
