[HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

[Russell Deffner]

Hi John,

 

It feels a bit odd to try and reply ‘on behalf of the AWG’ to…

So HOT activation group can you first inspect the instructions and then confirm with the project managers to see if we can reduce the possibility of different interpretations?  ie keep them as simple as possible.

But I think what you’re trying to address is a bit of a training/communication thing; each Project is created by an individual account that has permission/privilege on whatever instance of the Tasking Manager the project is created on. The main HOT instance for example has somewhere around 100 people/accounts that can create projects there. In order to try and get ‘better instructions’ we have set-up a mailing list for everyone to communicate (tm-project-managers@) and ideally we’ll get some great training via courses@ and LearnOSM.  In other words, we really do need to create some ‘best practices’ for making the most efficient projects for the desired result, but some of that needs to be HOT/Disaster specific and some should be more broad to help those running other instances of the Tasking Manager – such as TeachOSM.

 

Anyway, great discussion – just trying to direct some action – it is on the Activation WG Trello to ‘further utilize’ the tm mailing list, training, etc.

 

=Russ

 

From: john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0112 at gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:19 AM
To: Daniel Specht
Cc: hot at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [HOT] how newer mappers can help a lot with the validation process

 

So to clarify what you're saying is the project instructions should be much more precise.  The project managers should ask for precisely what is needed rather than we'd like everything since when we are imprecise different mappers and validators interpret the instructions differently.  Also asking for everything takes away resources from other projects.

So HOT activation group can you first inspect the instructions and then confirm with the project managers to see if we can reduce the possibility of different interpretations?  ie keep them as simple as possible.

Would it be an idea to go over the "abandoned" projects iethose that have been around for more than a year and see if by reducing the requested instructions we can at least get the highways and the major landuse=residential areas in?

Cheerio John

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20160216/e296a5fc/attachment.html>