[Strategic] Fw: [ppgis] RE: Collaborative slum mapping initiative with Google Map maker kicks off

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Muki wrote (as relayed by Mikel):
> Where is the Google Map Maker interface equivalence? Where is the 
> ability of anyone to start mapping within 2 minutes from wanting to do 
> so?

Just for the record, I have just:

* opened www.openstreetmap.org
* clicked on "sign up"
* entered an email address and user name
* waited for the confirmation email
* clicked on the confirmation link
* saved my profile
* fired up Potlach2
* moved a POI
* added a changeset comment
* saved my changes to the live database

All that in one minute and 47 seconds. Of course there was no time to 
read the terms and conditions, but I reckon that the same would be true 
for the two minutes with GMM mentioned above.

Of course I knew where to click and what to do, but there weren't a lot 
of mouse clicks or page views required... I would hazard a guess that 
unless you already hold a Google account for some unrelated reason, 
you'll have to wade through a process of at least this complexity with 
GMM as well?

> Just like with Linux, OSM have an ambivalent culture which at the same 
> time want people to join while feeling very proud that it is 'not for 
> everyone' and a certain level of mastery is required to join in.

Contributing to OSM is not for everyone full stop. This has nothing to 
do with pride. We can certainly stretch the envelope and make OSM more 
attractive and accessible to more people, but we must not fall into the 
trap of thinking that we can only be successful if all walks of life are 
equally represented in OSM. OSM is about making good map data, and for 
that we need a strong community. I am not convinced that the community 
becomes stronger the more diverse it is; I guess that his is only true 
up to a certain point. It is possible (and I'm not saying it *is* so, 
just that I haven't seen proof either way) that a determined community 
of 20 geeks could be making a better map of a city than a group 250 
concerned citizens.

I have a hunch that Google Map Maker is much less interested in building 
a working community, and more interested in "milking" people for 
contributions. That would dictate a different approach that would not 
necessarily be good for us to copy.

One point that illustrates our situation very well is the issue of 
anonymous contributions. All the time we're told by someone making a 
cool App that our signup process turns too many people away; that people 
would be willing to add a quick POI to the map on whatever App they're 
using but if that requires signing up with OSM first, and going through 
OAuth, then they won't bother. Our standard answer in this case is: 
We're not after single POIs contributed by Joe AppUser; we're after 
community members. We want to be able to get in touch with Joe if 
there's a question; we might even want to invite him to an event or 
something. If all you have is data, if you're just offering a "drive-by 
POI", then we're not interested. - This is a classic situation where 
everyone who has so much as read a book on UI tells us that we have a 
"problem" there, but so far we haven't budged, and for good reason. And 
that reason is not that we're "proud" to have a hurdle for entry.

> The 
> lack of a major sustained effort to make it as easy as Google Map Maker 
> - especially when there is such an obvious example out there - lead to 
> the conclusion that within the 'do'-ocracy that OSM is, not enough 
> people think that it's a top priority.

It is possible that it *is* not a top priority, or at least not at this 
time. I have gone on record saying that as long as we have a healthy 
growth, maybe we should just cherish and nourish that, knowing that 
we'll conquer the world eventually - and knowing that a humane growth 
rate also allows our infrastructure to grow with demand. - I agree that 
if we saw the numbers of active users stagnating we'd have to look for 
reasons, bus as long as our only problem is that we're not growing as 
fast as some people would like, I'm not sure I see the problem. But Kai 
will certainly fill us in on statistics ;)

> Universal usability, accessibility and ease of use are critical elements 
> of making participatory mapping system truly participatory and 
> democratic.

I don't think that our mission is necessarily creating a map in which 
everyone can "have a say". We're about recording facts, and we aim to be 
participartory in as much as this improves our fact recording. We are 
not about expressing preferences or allowing people to contribute their 
"view" of something. I have difficulty in seeing how "democratic" comes 
into play when we are talking about where the barber shop is, what its 
opening times are, and whether something on an aerial image is a forest 
or a meadow.

Bye
Frederik

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