<div dir="ltr">The overlapping water areas one might be a good example. Like, say, in some dreamy future the OSM editor could be tactile and as you trace a riverbed and near an area of the same riverbed that's already been traced your mouse "bounces" back. Yes, that would be great. <div>
<br></div><div>Dreamer's disclaimer: I am not intending to criticize anyone with this email. And I like tracing riverbeds. </div><div><br></div><div>A</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div>--<br>Alex</div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:40 PM, SomeoneElse <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lists@mail.atownsend.org.uk" target="_blank">lists@mail.atownsend.org.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div>Sandor Seres wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:36.0pt">... and maybe
therefore there is very little effort dedicated to errors,
especially to systematic errors. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Er what? There's a lot of effort going into all of the following:<br>
<br>
1) developing tools that enable new mappers to not make errors in
the first place<br>
<br>
2) detecting errors (things that are unlikely or impossible, based
on other things mapped)<br>
<br>
3) helping new mappers get to grips with mapping tools and map their
surroundings<br>
<br>
If you doubt that (2) and (3) occur I suggest that you pop in to one
of the country IRC channels where there is a "new mappers" and
"notes" feed after there's been a press article about OSM, such as
#osm-gb.<div class=""><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:36.0pt">Systematic
errors are having same, or similar causes. They are present in
a huge number and distributed all over the World. It is
difficult to see them, detect them and correct/repair them. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
What would be useful here would be some sort of example the sorts of
errors that you're talking about and (even better!) a suggestion as
to how a particular systematic error might be avoided. If you look
at the issues list for the iD editor (i.e. (1) in the list above)
you'll see lots of discussion balancing "making it easy for people
to contribute" and "making what people contribute more likely to be
correct". It's not easy; please don't assume that people haven't
had all of these discussions already.<div class=""><br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent:36.0pt">Usual editors
based one-by-one correction is meaningless.<br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
I disagree here. If something's been added to the map that's
physically impossible it's really useful that the various QA sites
flag it as an error. However in most cases to resolve it someone
will need to get out from behind their computer keyboard and Go And
Have A Look, because if an error that an online QA site can spot is
there, who knows what else is wrong? Merely removing the indication
that there is a problem on the QA site doesn't make what's in OSM
match reality.<br>
<br>
So, can you give an example of a systematic error that occurs in OSM
data (I can think of a few, but they're really "common new mapper
mistakes", and as such easily corrected by resurvey), and can you
give a suggestion as how to prevent / fix them?<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Andy<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:dev@openstreetmap.org">dev@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>