[HOT] Tasking Manager - Feedback and upcoming evolution
kate at maploser.com
Sat Jan 28 08:48:01 GMT 2012
I think the idea of crossing off subtasks is a great one. I've been
torn on the idea on creating a bunch of tasks for one area. I think
some people like to fully complete squares. Others don't of course.
I feel for me I'm faster if I can just map everything at once. Others
might not be comfortable mapping some types of objects if they don't
Definitely something I think we should look into when adding new
features to the workflow.
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 8:39 AM, David Schmitt <david at black.co.at> wrote:
> On 2012-01-26 20:50, Pierre GIRAUD wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> In the following document, I put together the most interesting
>> feedback comments contributors made about the tasking manager. The
>> bolder words are those I paid attention to.
>> I would sum up things with the following list of feature requests:
>> - split tasks:
>> Many users asked for this feature. It now looks obvious that mapping
>> main roads, minor roads or buildings represents a complete different
>> work. A job should be separated into different "tasks". Each task
>> would be materialized by a type of feature to map as well as a tile
>> (or area) size.
>> I started to design this new workflow. Please check it out here:
> That could really help getting a broader involvement even by people not
> willing to do the highest detail level. I'm wondering whether it might be
> even better if you could cross off all subtasks you've done on the tile you
> were working on? Like Swaziland's country-side has some areas with very few
> to none buildings, where you could map everything in a few minutes and mark
> off all subtasks with very few clicks, instead of re-taking the tile several
> times. This also ties in with the sub-division of tiles and the exclusion of
> water areas (which are a pain too).
>> - help mappers to communicate with each other:
>> Would a chat per job (in-the-page as in Facebook) help?
> I'm myself ain't the big chatter, but this triggered the following train of
> It'd be great to have an area where mapping standards could be
> discussed/defined. It is often hard for an outsider to identify major vs.
> minor roads in foreign countries. This could be on the osm-wiki and should
> include links to already well-mapped areas and/or identified screenhots of
> features on the available aerials from the area.
> Perhaps this should even become an integral part of the task description? A
> few well-mapped segments as task-seed could also go a long way towards a
> shared understanding of the required/expected/available accuracy and
> information density.
>> - second subdivision (1 tile into a 2x2 grid) for complicated areas:
>> I agree that this would be a nice yet useful feature. I think however
>> that this it's not easy to develop. I can think a bit more about it if
>> you think that this is a must-have.
> If this is too hard, a "partially done" status for the intense tiles might
> be sufficient? This could also tie in in with the subtasks: perhaps insert
> "Do X in the NW/NE/SW/SE corner of the tile" as checkable sub-task.
> Another idea here would be to be able to take multiple tiles at a time and
> reduce the tile-size further. For example, halve the area of a tile but
> allow the "checkout" of 8 tiles at once. That way in the city center you'd
> fetch one and be done with it and in the country-side you can fetch
> multiples, e.g. along a major road and fix-up that first.
> The annoying aspect - for me - was always the jarring flow breaker of having
> to wait until josm (even via remote) has loaded the next tile. If I could go
> through and add a bunch of expected sea-tiles in one swoop, download it once
> and the check them through for islands and stuff, that would totally go
> away, even with substantially smaller tiles.
>> Thanks for your feedbacks (again).
> Thanks for your coding! I'm already looking forward to these changes ;-)
> Best Regards, David
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
More information about the HOT