[OSM-talk] Serious consideration of "Newbie Editor"

Randy rwtnospam-newsgp at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 26 06:46:19 GMT 2010

Roy Wallace wrote:

>On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Liz <edodd at billiau.net> wrote:
>>I would suggest that Potlatch is left alone for its devotees.
>>I'd start with the following in the design brief for the "Newbie Editor"
>>Can add nodes, label them with default tags only (other than name).
>>Can add ways, again default tag list only, other than name.
>>Very limited deletion ability (no clear idea yet on how to define this).
>I suspect starting at even this level of complexity would cause
>feature creep towards Potlatch, anyway...In particular, being able to
>add/edit ways requires handling many complex concepts (as others have
>brought up), like joining ways, way direction, overlapping ways, etc.
>How about an even bigger step back? If starting a new editor from
>scratch is to be worthwhile, surely it should be a LOT more basic than
>all other existing editors. i.e. how about only these features:
>1) Add POI
>User specifies:
>   a) where it is
>   b) what it is (choose from a single list of options)
>   c) the name
>2) Edit Name
>   e.g. add or fix the name of an existing road - this should help a
>lot with noname roads
>Secondly: can we please decide on the scope of before we talk about
>the details of the implementation (flash/javascript/etc)?

My personal preference would be to provide a little more capability, such 
as adding a simple two-way highway, with only the minimum in selected 
presets, except for the name, and moving nodes to correct a highway within 
limits, but nothing more than that. But, as long as the architecture of 
the editor and the UI are designed so that limited additional capability 
can be added if/when it is deemed desirable, I have no problem with 
keeping to the extreme minimum, initially. Maybe simple way editing could 
be part of the "turbo" (please not "complex") editor mode. One thing I do 
think should be included in the simplist editor would be a way to tag any 
object with a FIX ME plus a comment. So that the user can as least flag a 
discovered error, even if it can't be fixed with the user's current 
editor/expertise. That would relieve a little frustration for someone who 
might feel that the simple editor was too restrictive and that the error 
they found will be lost once more.

And yes, there should be a prominent link to a page that briefly describes 
the other, more powerful editors a short list of pros and cons, and links 
to them.

I think something of this nature, maybe less, probably not more, would 
grab the user with "Yes, I can make a difference!" followed by "Now I want 
to make a bigger difference, and I've got some idea about where to go 
next." Maybe I'm wrong. Only time and the hard work of those with the 
expertise to do it will tell.


More information about the talk mailing list