[HOT] Validating

Blake Girardot bgirardot at gmail.com
Fri Mar 27 15:14:20 UTC 2015


Hi John,

I think what you write makes a lot of sense.

And as the person who wrote you says, this is also a very common feeling 
new mappers have, not being sure if they should mark a task done.

I think currently people who do create projects in the tasking manager 
try and keep what to map in mind as it relates to a few variables: 
difficulty of objects to map in general, mapper experience, imagery 
available, time and urgency among other things.

There is some room for experimentation as well. For example using the 
exact same area you could sequence the projects: 1st project just roads, 
next project just residential areas, next project building footprints, 
last project everything else. Or maybe building footprints could be last.

Which is very similar to your suggestion below about experience level of 
mappers and trying to tailor projects to meet that.

Or maybe that just increases the work load for mapping and validation 
having to go over the same area multiple times and some of it could be 
combined.

Thank you for the discussion, I know there are places we can improve and 
we just have to work some of them out.

On a related note: As James mentioned, I think "incomplete" is what I 
was coming to as well instead of invalid. Or as Charlotte suggested, we 
don't have to be bound to 1 word phrases :)

As soon as things quite down a little bit after a busy spring for HOT 
hopefully we can make some small adjustments around the edges and see if 
they help.

cheers,
blake





On 3/27/2015 1:09 PM, john whelan wrote:
>  > Hello, I read your message about validating, I am new,  I have
> digitized a lot of buildings for Malawi, and the Vanatu. I thought I
> should just jump in, work as completely as possible and then leave it to
> be validated. I don't feel confident enough to say its done. Is that the
> wrong way to go about, I don't want to generate a backlog for anyone.
> Thanks Keith
>
> I'll reply in the general message area because it maybe of interest to
> others.
>
> First any mapping you do will be of use and will be used.
>
> There are a couple of issues, first is OSM has many different opinions
> and these are just mine.
>
> HOT is more structured than OSM so we have a process where an area is
> defined, a tile and only one mapper works there at a time.  Ideally the
> tiles are the right size so one experienced mapper who knows what they
> are doing can complete a tile and mark it done in a session.  Then
> someone validates it.  Sometimes this is done in a maperthon where
> experienced mappers are available to assist.  Sometimes its done by
> people working by themselves.
>
> Reality at the moment is we have a lot of inexperienced mappers and even
> with the experienced ones they have different ideas about what should be
> tagged and how they should be tagged.  Some work is being done about
> getting guidelines drawn up with examples to assist.  Ideally with new
> mappers you want to validate and give feedback fairly quickly.  It
> reduces the number of errors in future and giving some sort of feedback
> is generally motivating but we do have tiles that haven't been validated
> in three years.
>
> On Project 917 I aim to validate within one day and often within a few
> hours.  I am not the project manager for 917 by the way.  If you look
> you'll see quite a few tiles that haven't been validated.  I marked them
> done so by convention someone else needs to validate them.
>
> Generally speaking if you break a complex task down then you can divide
> it up between less experienced people and leave the complex bits to
> others.  This is normal production line work flow.  We are dealing with
> volunteers so the more boring jobs just don't get done and we have a lot
> of boring jobs to do.
>
> For urgent tasks we can swamp them with mappers.  For less urgent tasks
> it becomes more complex how do we deliver as much as we can that is
> usable to the client, in this case the NGOs, given the very limited
> resources we have.  Mapping buildings is nice for the NGOs but given the
> choice between one village complete with all the buildings and twenty or
> thirty mapped in outlines complete with connecting roads which would you
> prefer and that's part of the reason many newer projects do not ask for
> buildings.  The other part is ones that do often don't get completed.
> Projects 684-689 are ones that ask for buildings.  Ebola related but its
> been some time since any mapping was done.  If you don't mind doing a
> few buildings by the way 684 has plenty.
>
> It takes time to go over a tile so if more than one mapper works there
> we are burning up resources as each one scans the tile.  If we simplify
> the tasks so that one less experienced mapper can go in and map the
> settlements and connecting roads then mark it done this is good.
> Validate it quickly and move on.
>
> When we add complications such as mines, schools, farmland, and ask
> mappers to tag the road according to the width then the less experienced
> mappers feel less confident about marking something done.  "If you can
> drive a 4X4 down it its a track", well yes but you'd be amazed where I
> can drive a 4X4 and some hazards for a 4X4 are not visible from a
> satellite image.  At that point we are probably spending more people
> time going over the same tile than we could be and the tasks are still
> not being marked done.  On 917 by the way I typically add in anything
> missing when validating so that can be a dozen settlements etc so just
> mark it done when you think its more or less complete and I'll sort it
> out but you need to know the validators on your project before you can
> tackle tiles this way.  Oh you'll probably get a message saying the
> little round things in clusters are huts in settlements by the way.
>
> So my comments on validation are aimed not so much at the urgent tasks
> where we can pull a rabbit out of a hat but more at how can we get more
> maps for the clients out the existing mappers and how do we keep the
> mappers we do have motivated?
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> Thanks John
>
>
>
>
> On 27 March 2015 at 02:34, Esther Zurcher <zhamm at att.net
> <mailto:zhamm at att.net>> wrote:
>
>     Hello, I read your message about validating, I am new,  I have
>     digitized a lot of buildings for Malawi, and the Vanatu. I thought I
>     should just jump in, work as completely as possible and then leave
>     it to be validated. I don't feel confident enough to say its done.
>     Is that the wrong way to go about, I don't want to generate a
>     backlog for anyone. Thanks Keith
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>



More information about the HOT mailing list