[OSM-talk] The OSM Applet - let's ditch it for JOSM (was: Mapping Reading, some impressions)

[vegard]

On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 02:22:20PM +0100, Nick Hill wrote:
> 
> If seasoned users are not prepared to put up with the shortcomings of 
> applet, then perhaps we shouldn't expect new users to do so either. I 
> haven't seen a good argument why new users shouldn't use best of breed 
> tools.
> 

As a fresh osm-user, I second that. I skipped the applet after a brief
look at it, did my research on where people went, and went straight to josm.
Unfortunately, some bad compiz/Xgl-combination seems to have creeped into my
Linux-box, so I lost the work in josm from yesterday in an X-crash :) But I 
liked the interface far much more than the applet.

> Tom Carden, I am in no way undermining the admirable work you have put 
> into the applet. I believe it has been an important step in the 
> evolution of OSM. I am simply making the point that because it is no 
> longer the tool of choice, and it has not been getting the attention it 
> needs, perhaps Tom Chance is correct in his opinion that presenting it 
> as the default editing interface causes more harm than good.
> 
> 

Conclusion: I don't think josm is too difficult. I believe most osm-users
are well above average in technical skills, even as beginners. I don't
think we stand much chance to attract much non-technical people. I might
be wrong, nothing would be better, but let's be a little realistic.

My impression as a first-time user, trying to think less technical: It
was far too difficult to get useful results. It has to be much easier to
take a GPX track, or a part of a GPX track, and convert it to a useful
way. It was far too much manual labor for an average newbie.

On another note:

Myself, I'm pondering on the following strategy:

1) Use the new "convert to data layer functionality" on the GPX tracks,

and rather

2) Delete the segments and points on both sides of the interesting part
of the route,

followed by

3) Cleaning of nodes/segments.

This, I found far easier than manually placing nodes and segments.

Is there any good reason not to do this?

And related to this, I do have a feature request: Make it possible to
delete "a range" of nodes and segments. This would make it very easy to
create ways....

Is there any particular reason why it can't be that easy? With an
accurate GPS, who am I to second where it places the nodes, if I haven't
deviated from the way? A quick control of the result is good, of course,
but I think it's a far quicker route to more complete maps if this gets
easier.

Feel free to flame me if there is a good reason to :)
-- 
- Vegard Engen, member of the first RFC1149 implementation team.