[HOT] validating tiles
bgirardot at gmail.com
Wed Mar 25 15:09:46 UTC 2015
This is kind of a very subtle point, but I have written about it before:
I find it difficult to validate tiles because they so often need more
work and are not really "done".
That leaves me with these choices:
1. Do the mapping myself, which I usually do, but then I have less time
for validating tiles.
2. Mark the tile "invalid" and know that a new mapper is going to get an
email saying their work has been "invalidated." I never do this unless
it was clearly marked done as a mistake.
3. Unlock the tile and leave it as is for someone else to deal with. I
do this more often than I care to admit.
I think we could do 1 or 2 things that would make the process a bit better:
1. We could change the term from "invalid", a somewhat strong term in
English and what I consider "de-motivating". I can't think of one word,
but we need something more friendly like "Needs more mapping"
2. Not send notices for "invalidated" tasks, and instead send
notifications for "validated" tasks. I think mappers would be more
motivated by getting positive feedback than negative feedback.
We could probably data mine the answer, but I wonder how many mappers
who marked a tile "done" (often not even the person who did the mapping)
and get an "invalidated" notice go then back and do the corrective mapping.
I think option 2 would be very easy to implement. I know I would do more
validations and tiles that needed more mapping might get more mapping if
I didn't have to worry about discouraging new mappers by "invalidating"
On a related note: I would encourage anyone who is doing training at
missing maps or mapping parties to let mappers know, "invalidated" is
totally fine and really just means "needs more mapping".
On 3/25/2015 2:51 AM, Daniel Specht wrote:
> Lots of projects are mapped quickly, but validated slowly. This could
> be because
> (A) beginners don't feel qualified to pass judgement
> (B) people don't like to pass judgement
> (C) doing original work is more fun than reviewing someone else's work.
> I have a couple suggestions for encouraging validation.
> 1. Include instructions for validation on the instructions tab.
> Because the instructions tab only has mapping instructions, readers
> may think that validation is for someone else to do.
> 2. Include validation statistics on the stats tab.
> Because the stats tab only has statistics for tiles completed,
> mappers may think that validating tiles is not essential. Also, these
> statistics give the mapper, but not the validator, a psychological
> reward. I've been validating a lot of tiles -- sometimes I seem to be
> doing most of the validations on a project -- and even though seeing the
> number by your name increment isn't the biggest thrill in the world, I
> have to admit that I miss it..
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
More information about the HOT