<html>
<body>
Hello,<br><br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Cheers to
Blake and Dan for articulating all I have been feeling<br>
about doing validations.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>I do think
that new terminology is needed ("invalidated" -- ugh!). <br>
Why not just change it to "needs more mapping"? We don't need a
single <br>
word.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Also, it
would be good to have a place to be a bit more specific<br>
about what more needs to be done, such as "some buildings
missing" or<br>
"some ways missing." <br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>As I think
I said before, it also took me a little while to figure <br>
out how to stop work on a particular section without clicking the <br>
"Done" button. After I figured out that all I had to do was
post a note <br>
about how much I had been able to do, I no longer was clicking
"Done"<br>
incorrectly. We should make sure that it is clear how to stop
working<br>
on a section and let people know it's not done.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Last, Dan
reminds us that someone (usually he) has to do the <br>
validation work and that we all should pitch in, even if we are not <br>
deeply experienced. If we see things that are not finished, but we<br>
don't have the time to finish them ourselves, there should be an easy
<br>
way to indicate that someone else still needs to get in there and finish
<br>
the corrections. That way, the work gets spread around.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Martijn
van Exel's Maproulette included several ways to indicate <br>
the status of each correction, such as "could not fix it" or
"needs more <br>
work." That is a good model for validating in HOT.<br><br>
Charlotte<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab><br><br>
At 08:09 AM 3/25/2015, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">This is kind of a very subtle
point, but I have written about it before: <br>
I find it difficult to validate tiles because they so often need more
<br>
work and are not really "done." That leaves me with these
choices: <br>
1. Do the mapping myself, which I usually do, but then I have less <br>
time for validating tiles. <br>
2. Mark the tile "invalid" and know that a new mapper is going
to get <br>
an email saying their work has been "invalidated." I never do
this <br>
unless it was clearly marked done as a mistake. <br>
3. Unlock the tile and leave it as is for someone else to deal with.
<br>
I do this more often than I care to admit. <br>
I think we could do 1 or 2 things that would make the process a bit <br>
better: <br>
1. We could change the term from "invalid," a somewhat strong
term <br>
in English and what I consider "demotivating." I can't think of
one <br>
word, but we need something more friendly like "Needs more
mapping" <br>
2. Not send notices for "invalidated" tasks, and instead send
notifications <br>
for "validated" tasks. I think mappers would be more motivated
by <br>
getting positive feedback than negative feedback. We could probably <br>
data mine the answer, but I wonder how many mappers who marked a <br>
tile "done" (often not even the person who did the mapping) and
get an <br>
"invalidated" notice go then back and do the corrective
mapping. <br>
I think option 2 would be very easy to implement. I know I would do more
<br>
validations and tiles that needed more mapping might get more mapping if
<br>
I didn't have to worry about discouraging new mappers by
"invalidating" <br>
tasks. <br>
On a related note: I would encourage anyone who is doing training at
<br>
Missing Maps or mapping parties to let mappers know,
"invalidated" is <br>
totally fine and really just means "needs more mapping." <br>
<br>
Cheers, <br>
Blake <br>
<br>
On 3/25/2015 2:51 AM, Daniel Specht wrote: <br>
> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated slowly.
This could <br>
> be because <br>
> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement <br>
> (B) people don't like to pass judgement <br>
> (C) doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone
else's work. <br>
> <br>
> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation. <br>
> <br>
> 1. Include instructions for validation on the instructions
tab. <br>
> Because the instructions tab only has
mapping instructions, readers <br>
> may think that validation is for someone else to do. <br>
> <br>
> 2. Include validation statistics on the stats tab. <br>
> Because the stats tab only has statistics for
tiles completed, <br>
> mappers may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also,
these <br>
> statistics give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological
<br>
> reward. I've been validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to
be <br>
> doing most of the validations on a project -- and even though seeing
the <br>
> number by your name increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world,
I <br>
> have to admit that I miss it.. <br>
> -- <br>
> Dan <br>
> > > <br>
_______________________________________________ <br>
> HOT mailing list >
<a href="mailto:HOT@openstreetmap.org">HOT@openstreetmap.org</a> <br>
>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot" eudora="autourl">
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot</a> <br>
> _______________________________________________ <br>
HOT mailing list
<a href="mailto:HOT@openstreetmap.org">HOT@openstreetmap.org</a> <br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot" eudora="autourl">
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
Charlotte Wolter<br>
927 18th Street Suite A<br>
Santa Monica, California<br>
90403<br>
+1-310-597-4040<br>
techlady@techlady.com<br>
Skype: thetechlady<br><br>
</body>
</html>