[HOT] [OSM-dev] [OSM-talk] Tool update from HOT: MapCampaigner

[Nate Smith]

Thanks for the comment and questions Frederik. Agreed that quality and
quantity isn’t exactly the same. And I hope that the UI in the tool hasn’t
communicated that this is just about statistics and quantity - it is more
than just a feature counter.

We certainly could say it is a richness monitor, but the goal and purpose
is more than that. I’d like to propose that during active field mapping
quality in OSM is about the type of tags, spelling or casing errors, and
whether you’ve created or updated data according to what you set out to
map. This is the feedback we’ve heard from field mapping work. A major
purpose of the tool is for tracking tag completeness and quality within a
time-bound mapping effort. Tracking quantity is only one aspect to show
whats been collected across an area. For many OSM field mapping efforts,
quality is a mixture of ensuring that an area is fully covered by visiting
on the ground, plus collecting the relevant and useful OSM tags — and
adding some spell checking and proper casing checks. That’s why I’m
referring to this as a quality monitoring tool - I think it can be used to
help improve quality during an active field mapping effort.

This also isn’t focused on producing one-time quality reports for an area
and so we’re not limiting the definition of quality only on the
humanitarian data model. The goal was to make this flexible and useful to
look at any type of tagging schema and track what’s being collected across
an area within a defined timeframe. You can set and define what you think
is completeness when you’re mapping. The pre-defined list is only a guide
for getting started quick. You can track custom individual tags or create a
complex custom data model based on what you want to track.

If you have some ideas on additional quality metrics we could add, that
would be great as this tool is just getting started. I would definitely
like to include more ways we can think about what quality data means during
field mapping.




On October 1, 2018 at 12:59:04 PM, Frederik Ramm (frederik at remote.org)
wrote:

Hi,

On 01.10.2018 03:28, Nate Smith wrote:
> Last week we
> released a new version of a data quality monitoring tool

I would like to recommend that you don't use the term "quality
monitoring tool" for this since you're measuring quantity not quality.
At best, I'd call it a tool that monitors "richness" or "completeness".

Simply counting how many features there are and how many of a
pre-defined list of tags each one has shouldn't be called "quality
monitoring", because there will be situations where the OpenStreetMap
community requests of project managers (who your web site claims to be
targeted at) that they implement some form of quality assurance; calling
your statistics tool a "quality monitoring" tool runs the risk of making
these people believe that quality requirements can be fulfilled by
ensuring that enough tags are set, which is definitely not what the
wider community would regard as a suitable quality assurance for a
humanitarian data entry project.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/hot/attachments/20181001/ea0c904f/attachment.html>