[OSM-talk] Who is a good mapper? Who isn't?

[Tom Davie]

On 11 Oct 2012, at 09:32, Peter Wendorff <wendorff at uni-paderborn.de> wrote:

> Am 11.10.2012 10:20, schrieb Kevin Peat:
>> On 10 October 2012 21:22, Richard Weait <richard at weait.com> wrote:
>>> What are the results?
>>> ...
>>> The most common comment quality is 18.
>>> Half of all accounts have comment quality from 13 to 36.
>>> Bots usually have comment quality under one.
>>> 
>> Equating changeset comment quality with mapper quality is total BS.
>> Descriptive comments are helpful to other mappers but that is all.
>> They don't tell you anything about the quality of the changes.
>> 
>> I think that in well mapped areas if your contributions persist over
>> time then probably you are a good mapper. If your changesets are
>> frequently reverted or your contributions are quickly edited by others
>> then probably not.
> +1
> But for the "quickly edited by others" part -1:
> If these changes refer to different attributes, that's totally fine.
> A mapper who maps streets, but isn't interested in the surface tag or width, another mapper active in the same region is and adds that regularly later, it's totally fine.
> But: Probably it's true that frequent changes of other mappers at existing tags mapper A added before is a good hint for a bad mapper.

You also have to take into account the level of interest in the areas.  The areas I work in for example, I might be producing crap, but no one else is interested in mapping here at the moment, so no one will replace it.

Bob