[HOT] Tech WG - tasking manager - workflow branch
nick.allen.54 at gmail.com
Tue Feb 4 09:51:17 UTC 2014
Thanks for your work on this - I like the interface, in particular
the ability to see which squares you have worked on, & to be able to
select them again - particularly helpful if you realise you've been
doing something slightly wrong (I'm sure we've all been there!) & you
want to go back & correct it on all the instances involved.
Splitting squares - I do it frequently, based upon how long I am
likely to be able to map without interruptions. I prefer not to leave a
square for someone else to finish off, and my life can have frequent
interruptions. My workflow now consists of - select a square, quick look
& if there are sufficient features to mean it will take me more than 20
minutes to complete, then split it. There's a very good chance I will
manage to do 3/4 of a whole square without an interruption, and I feel
better if I've left 3 smaller squares as complete so that a following
mapper just has a 'blank' square to work on.
.gpx traces & waypoints, and further information. This probably
exists somewhere, but I just haven't found it yet, but is there some
system for dealing with someone on the ground uploading actual waypoints
as opposed to simple gpx traces. When you upload a gpx trace to OSM it
strips away any waypoints you may have created. OSMTracker, most gps's &
other software can produce excellent information for adding to the maps,
such as type of way - primary/secondary/tertiary/unclassified/path etc.,
waypoints for the exact location of drinking water taps, wells, & road
I'd like to see the squares of a task identified individually such
as C:8, similar method to squares on a chess board, and I'd like to be
able to see the date the square was marked as complete, and date of
If I use Bangui , job 72, as an example, as the distinctions are more
obvious, but a similar problem must have occurred with Yolanda as
different versions of imagery became available . Since work first
started on this task, the Bing imagery has been updated. Some squares
have been mapped & validated using one version of Bing, and some with a
more recent. If the date information was available, it may be easier &
for whoever is validating to mark all squares completed before a certain
date for remapping.
We may be better going for a different thread on this until there is
some kind of consensus on what is needed. I have my own views. Comments
in emails indicate there are more and more mappers getting involved in
HOT, and I would like to see us developing our skills so we become more
useful to you.
I'd like to see the stage reached whereby a large number of mappers
for HOT are 'accredited' as validators, and only they are able to
validate. It may be that they work as mappers most of the time, and only
rarely validate. When there is a large scale activation, such as the
Typhoon Haiyan, a message could be sent out to all on the HOT mailing
list asking that all accredited validators assist in validating the
efforts of the influx of other mappers. I'd like to aim for an area
being mapped, and then validated very soon afterwards, with feedback
given to the mapper involved.
If there are lots of validators working on a task then you need some
method of seeing what has been validated, and what has not. I agree that
another layer of validation after this, looking at the 'big picture'
instead of small squares, is needed to improve the quality of the map
information, but the individual square method can improve our abilities
If someone is validating a square I've worked on, I'd like them to
be able to send me a message something like "Thanks for working on
square C:8 of task 500023. There are a number of islands in the river of
this square, and paths leading to the rivers edge. This may indicate a
crossing, but the islands are not showing on the map. If you use
relation 18323231, it is possible to draw round the islands, tag them as
'place-island', and add them to the relation - more information on this
is available at
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon. Would you
prefer to add these islands yourself so you get the practice, or should
I mark the square for further work by another. If I hear nothing from
you by 01/01/2014 I will mark the square for further action by another.
Thanks for reading
Volunteer 'Tallguy' for
Mapping volunteer 'Tallguy' for http://www.openstreetmap.org
Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasurer at 6thswanleyscouts.org.uk
<mailto:treasurer at 6thswanleyscouts.org.uk>)
On 04/02/14 08:13, Theodin wrote:
> Another idea:
> Maybe we could dothe process like Kort (OSM gamification
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kort_Game ) does it. There,
> several people must check a certain thing and after three sucessfull
> checks it gets accepted into OSM. That would be like a 2-step validation:
> first other mappers validate a tile 2-3 times
> second an experienced mapper validates it again blocks it and marks it
> as done.
> But maybe this process is too much work.
> Am 04.02.2014 00:38, schrieb Severin MENARD:
>> Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 05:46:50 -0800 (PST)
>> From: Mikel Maron <mikel_maron at yahoo.com
>> <mailto:mikel_maron at yahoo.com>>
>> To: Pierre GIRAUD <pierre.giraud at gmail.com
>> <mailto:pierre.giraud at gmail.com>>, HOT Openstreetmap
>> <hot at openstreetmap.org <mailto:hot at openstreetmap.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [HOT] Tech WG - tasking manager - workflow branch
>> <1391435210.32961.YahooMailNeo at web161701.mail.bf1.yahoo.com
>> <mailto:1391435210.32961.YahooMailNeo at web161701.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> Thanks for the update, great to hear about the progress and new
>> UI features.?
>> So I'm clear, you're talking about
>> And by v2, are we talking about this version?
>> On validation, I agree it needs a rethink. There is definitely a
>> need for validation in some form. But I'd hesitate to remove
>> functionality, the current validation without replacing it with
>> something else. I suggest we keep it for now, and move on
>> discussion of what this should really look like.
>> From my experience over the last months I would say the validation is
>> - by task to review what each contributor did. The green step would
>> be good ONLY IF IT COULD BE INVALIDATED. Currently once validated, it
>> cannot be revert and the task cannot be selected anymore. This is
>> really a pain as some mappers validate tasks that are far for being
>> done. I must also confess I validated one or two tasks by accident
>> myself. Is it not possible to easily remove this blocking feature and
>> make the validation reverted if needed?
>> - over the whole mapped area, to harmonize the mapping and set a
>> coherent road network. For more details, refer to the discussion I
>> had on this list with Nick Allen a few weeks ago. Create a wikipage
>> on this is still on my todo list.
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the HOT