[HOT] [Tasking Manager] enhancements - testers required

[Pierre GIRAUD]

On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 9:59 PM, David Schmitt <david at black.co.at> wrote:

> Hi Pierre,
>
> thank you for working on the Task Manager. It is an important piece of S/W
> in- and outside of HOT.
>
>
> On 2013-01-12 21:18, Pierre GIRAUD wrote:
>
>> The most important (new) things to notice are:
>>   - tiles can be accessed in a read-only mode,
>>   - with this in mind, tiles url (in the address bar) can be used to be
>> shared to someone else. This might be useful to use a tile as reference
>> in a discussion between mappers,
>>
>
> That was something quite confusing about the task manager: you had to
> login to do *anything*. I see on the dev server, that it's still a
> requirement to login to browse the tasks. Is this really necessary? It
> would be nicer if a login would be *only* necessary for "write" actions,
> like locking/commenting ?


You're right. Accessing a tile in read-only mode shouldn't require a login.
I'm not sure a user should be able to access a job without being logged in.


>
>
>    - you need to explicitly lock the tile before working on it,
>>
>
> So I can load and edit things without locking? To my engineering mind,
> that sounds like a recipe for conflicts. I do not understand the use case.
> Is there a workflow, where one needs to lock the task, but not load it into
> an editor? That would be better served with "lock", "lock and load".
>

User may want to see it in an editor before they want to lock the tile to
work on it. But I agree that conflicts may happen if users forget to lock
the tile.
On the first round I tried to display the "load in editor" buttons only
after a lock, then decided to show them after selection. I can change it
back easily if this sounds better.

>
> With my UX head on, "lock" also sounds very technical and forebidding.
> Perhaps "Work on this" might be more inviting. Also in the history "Locked
> by ..." does not describe what's happening. "X started to work" or "X
> reserved the tile," might be more to the point.
>

Terminology is important. I agree.
I'm happy to share ideas about UX. This is something I'm really sensitive
to.

In MapCraft they're using the following words: "take", "abandon",
"reserved", "freed", "owner".
I'm open to suggestions if others have any.
Otherwise, I like the "Start to work on this", "X started to work on this".

>
> BTW, would it be possible to get a link/integration to one of those
> whodidit services? Not everything that happens in a location is going
> through the task manager.
>
>   https://www.google.com/search?**q=whodidit+openstreetmap<https://www.google.com/search?q=whodidit+openstreetmap>


Can you elaborate how you see this integration?

>
>
>    - comments are now required when marking a task as done or
>> (in)validating one,
>>
>
> What should users put there? Thinking back to the tiles I did, I can only
> remember one or two tiles where I felt a comment was required.


Maybe a comment is not really required when marking a task as done.
In my opinion, it's required when invalidating though.

>
>
>    - users have access to the tile change history.
>>
>
> Which surely helps making comments more useful. But required?
>
>
>  I'm not sure how important the locking is when an advanced user wants to
>> (in)validate the work done on a job.
>> How about allowing validation without any lock. Or maybe we should
>> rethink the validation process.
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>
> I think locking is important when the workflow "expects" the user to write
> to the tile.
>
> Regarding the question of motivating people to re-take tiles for
> validation, this too (like "lock") might be a problem of the used word:
> "validation" sounds academic, important and of high responsibility. As a
> arm-chair mapper with only very little knowledge of the task's background,
> it is not my place to *validate* edits. Perhaps call it "second-pass"? That
> could lower the barrier. Also, I'm of the opinion that the data-user (in
> all of OSM) has to do her own validation to see whether the data is up to
> the required accuracy for the intended usage. Again this is not something
> someone from the wider community can do. Third, real validation can be done
> in batches, where much more than a single tile is pre-loaded into josm,
> background tiles are downloaded in batches and then quickly checked. This
> would not require locking or loading through the TM, but only invalidating
> or accepting the checked tiles.
>
>
> Best Regards, David
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/hot<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot>
>



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------
  | Pierre GIRAUD
-------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20130115/cc521abc/attachment.html>