[HOT] Mapswipe - whats happening with the data?

john whelan jwhelan0112 at gmail.com
Sun Mar 26 15:58:01 UTC 2017


>It's definitely useful to save actual mapper's time. For validation I'm
not sure it would be a big help.

I must be missing something.  Mapswipe uses four passes and then we get
different sized tiles out of it.  We still need an old fashioned mapper to
map the tile.  Traditionally if a mapper thought the tile size was too big
they would split it to give different sized tiles.

How does it save mapper time?  Does that take into account the four passes
that mapswipe uses first?

On the validation side really all you need is to inspect the tile and say
its OK. If the tile is good enough you don't need to add anything.  From a
practical point of view a conventional validator could do it in one pass
provided we trusted them.  You'd still want to run JOSM for things like
duplicate segments, crossing ways etc but that's faster than having to do a
visual inspection as well.

Cheerio John

On 26 March 2017 at 10:46, Jo <winfixit at gmail.com> wrote:

> It's definitely useful to save actual mapper's time. For validation I'm
> not sure it would be a big help.
>
> Op 26 mrt. 2017 3:12 p.m. schreef "john whelan" <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>:
>
> Would we be better ahead by using something like mapswipe to validate?  If
>> a tile is OK there is no need to add to the map from the tool.  If three
>> mappers tick it then I would say its good to go.
>>
>> The current system we use four mappers to mapswipe, then a conventional
>> mapper to map followed by a validator.  Six passes to get a validated
>> tile.  The other way would give you one in four passes three of which would
>> be on smartphones.
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 26 March 2017 at 09:01, john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> But does it address the concern about how much effort is expended
>>> compared to the value added?
>>>
>>> Cheerio John
>>>
>>> On 26 March 2017 at 08:44, Ralf Stephan <gtrwst9 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Search is your friend. Searching for Mapswipe yields eg
>>>> http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/2521
>>>> where clearly the tiles are preselected. Also the description: "The
>>>> data are prepared by MapSwipe"
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 2:40 PM john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I seem to recall the same area is mapswiped by four different people
>>>>> before a mapper maps it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Other than the size of the tile or which area to give priority to I
>>>>> think the advantage is that people can do it anywhere on a smartphone.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would hesitate to say if it is worth doing or not.  In future there
>>>>> might be a way to bring something into OSM via a review process.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheerio John
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26 March 2017 at 08:22, Hakuch <hakuch at posteo.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26.03.2017 14:13, john whelan wrote:
>>>>> > My understanding is that mapswipe is only used to identify where to
>>>>> map.
>>>>> > Not to contribute to the map.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Cheerio John
>>>>>
>>>>> of course there is no data transmitted to OSM, but how is the data (I
>>>>> mean, marked tiles) used after I transmitted it? How much is it worth
>>>>> to
>>>>> do that mapswiping?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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/20170326/6529eb05/attachment.html>


More information about the HOT mailing list