[HOT] Mapping buildings something to think about

Mikel Maron mikel.maron at gmail.com
Tue Apr 11 14:16:32 UTC 2017


All, let's draw this thread to a close. I think we can safely take away that additional training, validation, tool and process improvement is needed. Most importantly, in the future please keep in mind -- we are all working hard together to make the map. We owe each other respect in our communications, and constructive comments that lead us forward. Anything else drowns out the value of what you want to say.Thanks-Mikel
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron 

    On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 9:00 AM, Ralf Stephan <gtrwst9 at gmail.com> wrote:
 

 Just an idea. As to quality I think HOT/OSM can learn from zooniverse.org where they have lots of projects with thousands of citizen participants that produce science data, mostly to provide classifications for AI learning. For example each project sporadically presents the user without telling with pre-classified tasks in order to assess their reliability. Also, they use classifications from several users to get the end results, that's our validation, but can we do more like this? I'm sure zooniverse does even more under the hood, maybe we should ask them?
Regards, 
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 1:53 PM john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you Majka.

I think Majka has pinned down one major problem.  Same problem as I had with trainee programmers to them speed was important.  In HOT we shoot ourselves in the foot by saying this project is urgent, implying speed is of the essence.  We need a different way to say this.

This project is important perhaps?

Can we incorporate some elements of Majka's words into learnOSM.

Just for the record I'm not against iD I've seen someone map a building perfectly without even touching S to square the building, but if you're mapping buildings I don't think its the best tool for the job for new inexperienced mappers.

The other thing that has come up on the thread is the lack of validators.  Like Polyglot I'm tired of seeing the same mistakes made over and over again.  I've cut back on validating to a single project at the moment.  I've left messages for a number of mappers only to see them make the same mistakes a week or so later and these are mappers I've given feedback to within 24 hours of their mapping.  Yes there are some who have gone on to become solid mappers but they aren't the majority.

At the moment I'm loading in sections of the map and correcting crossing ways, highways that almost meet etc. normally without feedback.  It cleans the map up but it would be better if we could catch the mistakes before they are made.  JOSM will warn about crossing highways before uploading.  I'm not sure if iD etc does but there are many many many of them.

If you want more validators or people to do more validation I think you have to ask yourselves can the job be made more attractive in some way and error prevention might help.

Cheerio John

On 11 April 2017 at 07:25, majka <majka.zem+talk at gmail.com> wrote:

I have to admit, I couldn't use iD for "bulk" mapping for the life of me. I find it suitable for the one-off mapping / for doing corrections only. But some mappers do and do well with this. You can find haphazardly mapped buildings and untagged ways and nodes using JOSM for mapping as well, just not as often.A better "building tool" for iD would help some but not for all of it.
The fundamental problem is that some mappers fail to understand mapping isn't a race. Somehow, the number of edits / added buildings / changes became more important than precision. We are partly promoting this by looking at the number of edits to declare a mapper as experienced.
I try to explain to the mappers that sometimes the work is done so badly that it would be better to do only one tenth of it but to do so correctly. As English is my third or fourth language, I struggle with the correct way to explain this, to get the right mix of being diplomatic and to get through - above all when I am shouting and swearing in my head at the person who has done the mapping.
If I could wish for one thing only to start every new mapper with, it would be this: Exact and precise mapping is more important than anything else. Do not map for quantity but for quality. And if unsure about tagging, look for help. In HOT tasks, read what is expected from you and do exactly so.
Here comes the importance of earliest possible validation - to stop the bad habit from forming. New mappers (and old ones as well) would still make mistakes but we shouldn't ignore the systematic ones just because it is a new mapper and we don't want to be too hard on them.
Everything else comes with experience, the speed of work as well. It is not a problem of HOT alone - locally, a new mapper without any experience has uploaded more than 100 changesets within the first 24 hours after his registration. Every single one of it has to be corrected somehow. Leave it long enough uncorrected and the map quality will degrade with tons of useless data obscuring the correct ones.
We should somehow try to promote the idea that mapping isn't a speed race. There are not that many tasks really time critical and even then the real usefulness of tasks mapped just for speed is somewhat suspect. I would say, as there are more mappers available than validators, I cannot see any reason for "wasting" validator's time on remapping tasks. And remapping is what happens often when validation isn't done as soon as possible and fundamental mistakes are not caught early. I am often commenting on half finished tasks for this reason as well - no reason to leave the problems untouched until validation.

Majka
_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________
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/20170411/846a5f05/attachment.html>


More information about the HOT mailing list