[HOT] Tech WG - tasking manager - workflow branch
linux at brownhat.org
Sun Feb 9 08:33:10 UTC 2014
I like this idea a lot. Having a validation system based on some kind
of voting. I think it could work well.
As Theodin says, we could have users that look at a tile and say "looks
good to me". Once you have three of these, you mark the tile as
You can also have "special" users that can invalidate and/or validate in
There could be also a per-task configurable threshold. So for tasks
with many users the task admin can put an higher number of votes to
validate and have a better confidence in the data. Other tasks could
have just one vote needed, reverting to how the system currently works.
About invalidation: I am not so confident that a down-voting system
could work. I would prefer that an experienced mapper has the ability to
invalidate if he sees something wrong.
Some experimentation could be needed.
On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 09:13:23AM +0100, 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
> 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
> > Message-ID:
> > <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"
> > Pierre
> > Thanks for the update, great to hear about the progress and new UI features.?
> > So I'm clear, you're talking about
> > merging?https://github.com/pgiraud/osm-tasking-manager/tree/workflow
> > into?https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager
> > <https://github.com/pgiraud/osm-tasking-manager/tree/workflowinto?https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager>
> > ?
> > And by v2, are we talking about this version?
> > https://github.com/pgiraud/osm-tasking-manager2
> > 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 two-folds:
> > - 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.
> > Sincerely,
> > Severin
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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