[HOT] Tech WG - tasking manager - workflow branch

Severin MENARD severin.menard at gmail.com
Mon Feb 10 11:12:36 UTC 2014


Hi,

This could be a nice idea to consider a tile validated only if done by
three different people, but from my experience on Activation and TM jobs, I
fear this is not really realistic considering finding volunteers for
validation has always be complicated. I cannot imagine if we would need now
to find three for every TM job... I would suggest rather that the
Validation uses the new functions the TM v2 will offer:
- Validation can be reverted
- we can highlight who has validated what by clicking in the validation
list. If it has been done by a not very experienced mapper (what can be
easily checked on his OSM profile), it would been good someone more
experienced verifies it
- from what you suggest a new interesting possibility would to allow
various people to validate, but I do not know if it could be implemented
easily
- another possibility could be to use the existing Private options (=a TM
Job can be used only by listed OSM mappers) for Validation


> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2014 08:33:10 +0000
> From: Daniele Venzano <linux at brownhat.org>
> To: Theodin <theodin at posteo.de>
> Cc: hot at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [HOT] Tech WG - tasking manager - workflow branch
> Message-ID: <20140209083310.GD28603 at brownhat.eu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> 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
> validated.
> You can also have "special" users that can invalidate and/or validate in
> one click.
>
> 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.
>
> Thanks,
> Daniele
>
> 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
> > 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.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Theodin
> >
> >
> > 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20140210/978f67f0/attachment.html>


More information about the HOT mailing list