[HOT] wish list for validators.

john whelan jwhelan0112 at gmail.com
Sun Apr 9 13:16:39 UTC 2017

Comment on the validation FAQs.

Comment one feedback, the document talks about positive feedback with
"great work!" citing Martin's research.  Martin's work does not say that
and we have had the discussion here before about the subject.

Comment two
exists I suggest a reference to it.

Comment three nowhere does it mention the desirability of using JOSM.
Nothing else catches the duplicate nodes, crossing highways with no node
and highways that almost meet. JOSM validation hits a few more as well.

Comment four squaring buildings.  When you square them you change the area
and orientation.  You are doing an approximation. iD is quite capable of
drawing a square building, if its a building only project JOSM
building_tool plugin is faster and accurate.  JOSM can be run from a USB
Stick.  Squaring buildings might look prettier but I don't think it has any
part of validation and I certainly do not think a validator should square
buildings with the nuclear JOSM option.  (select buildings with less than a
certain number of nodes, subselect mapper then "q".)

Comment five at what point do feedback messages become a nuisance?  We have
mappers who have mapped more than a thousand tiles accurately.  Are you
going to give them 1,000 well done messages?  If the work is more than ten
days old its probably not worth giving feedback.  If they are making a
consistent mistake then hopefully it will have been corrected by now and
you stand the chance of alienation with 20 messages pointing out the same
mistake on work that is a year old.  That's why its important to give
feedback quickly.

Comment six, given the recent very large Belgium mapathon validating within
a short period of time became a major challenge.  Giving detailed feedback
to mappers who will only map once takes about three or four times more time
than just checking the tiles.  Do you decide to validate as many tiles as
possible or give detailed feedback?  Pros and cons?

Comment seven most new mappers are not confident enough to mark a tile
done.  These are the mappers you want to catch making errors so they don't
get set in their ways.  Should they be mentioned somewhere?

Have fun

Cheerio John

On 9 April 2017 at 07:55, Matthew Gibb <mjngibb at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi John, as Pete mentioned, I think there are going to be a number of
> features in the TM3 that will help with managing and validating projects.
> I've been putting together a Validation FAQ if anyone would like to
> contribute: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BIbdrrSRueNdxvyoYJJm10VGH-
> hy0BM13UlSJglgrEg/edit#heading=h.di2zopdzc88x
> We've also got a #validation channel on the HOTOSM slack group, to help
> prompt some discussion on validation.
> Matt
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 4:56 AM Florian Niel <florian.niel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Maybe there could be a button below the "Take a task at random" which
>> says "Validate a task at random" and behind this button there is an
>> algorithm which selects the most reasonable task square.
>> What makes a task good for validation?
>> 1) It has to be finished recently
>> 2) Tasks by this user have not been validated yet (or just few)
>> 3) The user is unexperienced
>> 4) Special importance to users whose tasks vere invalidated
>> 5) A checkbox (something like "please validate quickly") next to the
>> "Mark task as done", where mappers can somehow request quick validation
>> (because they are not sure if they have done it right). Checking this box
>> would put the task on top of this list. And when this task has been
>> validated the user should get a message.
>> Another validation-related topic:
>> For me as a mapper, I wish that I would have a list of my finished tasks
>> where I see which have been validated / invalidated. It would give me a
>> boost when I see I am doing things right.
>> Florian
>> Am 25.03.2017 um 17:31 schrieb Pete Masters:
>> Hi John, I mentioned this to Blake as feedback to the TM3
>> consultation.....
>> Pete
>> On 25 Mar 2017 16:08, "john whelan" <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Some way to spot the most recently mapped tiles that have not been
>> validated.  The current activity list isn't too bad except when a mapathon
>> hits then there are more tiles than the activity list can hold.  Also
>> validating takes up slots on the list.
>> The reason I'm after the most recently mapped tiles is the sooner I can
>> catch a problem the fewer times it gets repeated so the fewer times it
>> needs to be corrected.
>> I need the order in which they were mapped most recent first.
>> Thanks John
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing listHOT at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
> _______________________________________________
> HOT mailing list
> HOT at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20170409/028d137a/attachment.html>

More information about the HOT mailing list