[HOT] Nepal rural areas - tagging forests and farmland?

Dan S danstowell+osm at gmail.com
Thu Apr 30 15:22:50 UTC 2015


Hi Falkmar,

Welcome and thanks for your effort!

The best way to think about this is that we want to get the maximum
benefit we can, out of your time. That's why we don't ask you to map
everything - in the task instructions it's usually very specific about
the type of "feature" that needs mapping. So if it's not mentioned in
the task instructions, please feel free to ignore the feature.

Some people add extra features (such as farms, woodland) when they are
easy to see on aerial imagery and they might be useful landmarks.
Also, in terms of your personal concentration sometimes it helps to
map "interesting" things as well as "important" things, it makes the
job a bit more fun.

Validators should not penalise you for adding, or not adding, extra things.

But I'd suggest keep the "extras" to a fairly low level, because
they're not the humanitarian priority. Our job here is not to "finish"
the map but to make it useful for the humanitarian needs.

Best
Dan


2015-04-30 8:16 GMT+01:00  <falkmar at gmx.net>:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm completely new to this and just started mapping in Nepal. Now I noticed
> that some people extensively tag woodland and farmland in the rural areas of
> Nepal, while the majority does not. I've seen validated squares with and
> without these tags.
> Now my first guess is that since it's basically *all* wood- and farmland out
> there, these tags just clutter the map and should be omitted. But what is
> the official stance on this?
>
> Many thanks!
>
> -Falkmar
>
> _______________________________________________
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot



More information about the HOT mailing list