[HOT] Validating & TM2 - providing feedback to new mappers

[Nick Allen]

Hi,

On the subject of validation.

As someone who now spends most of their mapping time validating, I think 
we 'sell' it the wrong way. I only use the validation button in JOSM now 
if I think I am going to find something, and generally use the 
HOT-Validate paint Style (Well worth trying if you're a JOSM user, even 
if you don't validate). But I think even that is too much of a 
requirement. I have seen some excellent mapping by iD & Potlatch users & 
I would like to see some of them carrying out validating - if they are 
capable of mapping to such a high standard then they are perfectly 
capable of zooming in to look at others work & saying 'yes', 'yes but', 
or 'no'. I rarely use the 'no' option and to be honest it could just as 
easily be an experienced mapper because it generally means there is a 
significant portion of the square not mapped (I like to think the 
imagery didn't load properly & that was why they missed the village 
entirely!)

Mapping =
I'd like to see us rewrite the manuals, wiki's, slideshows etc., so they 
show mapping for HOT needs roads connected, traced at a suitable scale & 
classed more or less correctly (I don't think we should get too hung up 
about this - its often only when you are looking at an area of several 
squares in size that you can work out which are the primary, secondary, 
tertiary etc - get it traced, tag what it looks like & make sure that 
someone with an overview alters the tags later if need be). Buildings 
square or round and as accurate as they can be within reason. Rivers 
traced. leisure= common & amenity=school where appropriate - anything 
else specific to the project.

Validating=
Make sure that Mapping = was done ok.

It would be good to offer variety to our mappers & validating, if sold 
correctly, is not difficult & can be very rewarding. 99% of the time I'm 
making comments like 'All looks good, thanks'. Occasionally it's 
something like 'Looks good, but can you join the roads to each other & 
not the landuse=residential boundary. I've sorted it this time', I 
worried for a while about sending messages to mappers about ways they 
could improve, but the feedback I've had from those concerned has been 
good, and I make sure I only send a message if it's obvious the person 
is making the same mistake consistently - a point in case being round 
huts which are not obvious unless someone points them out. (wiki entry 
about validating 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data 
if I've interested you).

I'd still like a tick box in the TM so that when I want to send my 
comments to the mapper, I can easily do so. But I don't think that is as 
important as allowing mappers easier access to the validators comments.

Just a few thoughts -  by the way, I'd welcome help from anyone who 
fancies doing more validating! If you'd like it, I'm quite happy to 
validate your validations until you feel more confident.

-- 

Nick

Volunteer 'Tallguy' for 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Humanitarian_OSM_Team

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Tallguy

Treasurer, website & Bonus Ball admin for 
http://www.6thswanleyscouts.org.uk/ (treasurer at 6thswanleyscouts.org.uk 
<mailto:treasurer at 6thswanleyscouts.org.uk>)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20140901/e9cecdbc/attachment-0001.html>