[OSM-dev] Am I alone here?
alex.rollin at gmail.com
Wed Mar 5 16:55:54 UTC 2014
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.
Dreamer's disclaimer: I am not intending to criticize anyone with this
email. And I like tracing riverbeds.
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:40 PM, SomeoneElse <lists at mail.atownsend.org.uk>wrote:
> Sandor Seres wrote:
> ... and maybe therefore there is very little effort dedicated to
> errors, especially to systematic errors.
> Er what? There's a lot of effort going into all of the following:
> 1) developing tools that enable new mappers to not make errors in the
> first place
> 2) detecting errors (things that are unlikely or impossible, based on
> other things mapped)
> 3) helping new mappers get to grips with mapping tools and map their
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> Usual editors based one-by-one correction is meaningless.
> 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.
> 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?
> dev mailing list
> dev at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the dev