[HOT] Tech WG - tasking manager - workflow branch

xkomczax at centrum.cz xkomczax at centrum.cz
Tue Feb 4 16:55:21 UTC 2014

Hi all,

as a regular mapper I can really appreciate the validation function. I am sometimes doing the validation, but without this function it is really hard to do it: I have no idea which areas were already checked by the others or even by me, because sometimes I am forgetting exactly which squares I already checked. 

Yeah, the functionality is not widely used (even trough a lot of people is watching just for the number of green squares and they are forgetting to count the squares which were unvalidated). I can remember when the action covering typhoon Haiyan started I wasn't sure if I am enough experienced to do validation. After short conversation on IRC where the guys encouraged me I did so and found out it isn't that hard. Maybe there can be changed the formulation of who can do the validation (because even now I don't feel like "an experienced mapper") and encourage the people to do so (with some explanation and possible link to the wiki). I strongly agree with Kate's opinion on not removing once implemented functionality. Maybe it can be just optional choice for the one who is creating the job if he/she wants to have this functionality on/off.

What I really like is the idea of invalidating once validated squares. Maybe I can even appreciate possibility to distinguish my own squares from the others ones – I am not using the random validation button but I am mostly choosing it by myself. Therefore little bit different color of the square or some nearly invisible bordering will be great. 


> Od: Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com>
> Komu: Pierre GIRAUD <pierre.giraud at gmail.com>
> Datum: 04.02.2014 17:08
> Předmět: Re: [HOT] Tech WG - tasking manager - workflow branch
> CC: "HOT Openstreetmap" <hot at openstreetmap.org>
>Hi All,
>On the other side of "for validation" it is a well liked feature for
>some of our more traditional partners. (Including those that
>originally funded v2 of the tasking manager)
>It would be nice not to take features away from the 1st version. I
>would suggest we look at ways to encourage validation. I think one way
>for example would be to let people validate more than one square at a
>On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 10:54 PM, Pierre GIRAUD <pierre.giraud at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey Harry!
>> You read my mind.
>> Let's try without validation.
>> I'm pretty sure that the validation feature can be re-added in a near
>> future. We just need to find a way to have something easy to understand for
>> the end user. And I am convinced that if it's simple for the end-user it
>> will not require to much effort to implement.
>> For the most motivated of us, I think that UI mockups are a neat way to
>> brainstorm and share ideas.
>> Pierre
>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Harry Wood <mail at harrywood.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Seems people aren't sure about the idea of removing the validation step,
>>> but I think it's good idea. I'm sure Pierre is suggesting this change having
>>> looked quite carefully at the way people are using the task manager system.
>>> The idea of validation was to allow pro-mappers to coordinate the process
>>> of double-checking over the area of a whole job, without too much
>>> duplication of that double-checking effort, but how many whole jobs has this
>>> happened on? It's easy to see the validation step has not been adopted much.
>>> Either we don't have many pro-mappers with confidence to validate, or
>>> they're not that interested in doing validation (perhaps because we have a
>>> steady flow of new jobs work on)
>>> And the thing which is always easy to overlook, the feature comes at a
>>> cost. It makes the system that little bit more complex to understand.
>>> I like the idea of trying without validation. A compromise might be to
>>> have it as some sort of hidden feature, but then that's effort to develop
>>> something which few users see.
>>> Harry
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Pierre GIRAUD <pierre.giraud at gmail.com>
>>> To: HOT Openstreetmap <hot at openstreetmap.org>
>>> Sent: Sunday, 2 February 2014, 18:46
>>> Subject: [HOT] Tech WG - tasking manager - workflow branch
>>> Hi all,
>>> It's been a while now that I've started working on a "workflow" branch
>>> (more than a year ago). The main purpose of this development was to improve
>>> the user experience by simplifying the interface a bit.
>>> This branch is the one used for the instance working at
>>> http://tasks2.hotosm.org.
>>> I'm now confident and I think that it's ready. I would now like to merge
>>> the work into the master branch and update the main instance. It will also
>>> eventually allow us to remove this second instance. I will do my best to
>>> retrieve the data as well.
>>> For those who don't know yet, in addition to user interface modification,
>>> the main enhancement is deep linking ie. links to tasks in a read only mode.
>>> This allow users to share a link to the task they are working on for
>>> example.
>>> I also got rid of the "validation" process because it has been the source
>>> of problems recently. Let's rethink this feature if we really need it.
>>> People still can invalidate tasks though.
>>> If no one is fiercely against i, I'll do the merge later this week.
>>> This will help me give an answer to Mikel and others who were asking me
>>> how much work is left to get v1 functionnalities in v2.
>>> Regards,
>>> Pierre
>>> --
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>>   | Pierre GIRAUD
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> HOT mailing list
>>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>> --
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>   | Pierre GIRAUD
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>HOT mailing list
>HOT at openstreetmap.org

More information about the HOT mailing list