[OSM-talk] New technology ...

[Lester Caine]

Tom MacWright wrote:
> Hey Lester,
>
> I agree entirely - thus far we aren't focusing on the mobile version of the
> site. It's never been very polished, and recent changes aren't focused on
> improving it significantly.
>
> As far as why, it's pretty simple - changes to the site are extremely
> time-intensive because of its myriad uses and the necessity of having a
> community process. That is, we've needed to focus on specific parts of the site
> because, even if we agree that many things need to be done, we only have enough
> designers & developers to implement one or two things a month.
And some of us are hampered by the choose of tools that was made previously!

> I think there are two solid ways forward here:
>
> First, which is admittedly less likely, is if anyone wants to adopt the task of
> maintaining, testing, and improving the mobile site, and pushing those changes
> through.
There are a few options as a good starting point, but your 'third' point is 
probably accurate here.

> Second, which is more doable but more likely to get over-communicated, is for
> someone to write a simple page pointing to good mobile options. For instance,
> users of GPS units should easily find out about Garmin extracts, smartphone
> users should easily find editors that work on their phone or apps that use
> OpenStreetMap data.
http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/Mobile+Computing :)
But I'm getting bogged down by what does not work in each of the options and I 
don't have time to try the options that are missing. I need to switch from Locus 
to one of the other options just to establish where the identified safety issues 
actually arise from! If you can't trust a configuration then it's unusable, and 
that is part of the current problem.

> Independent OSM-based tools do a better job at the very specific use-cases
> people have on mobile - whereas the website focuses strongly on one use case,
> editing, and has no smartphone-compatible editors.
Adding data via the tablet is easier than actually using it on the tablet ...

> (To tackle the inevitable points of argument that follow that: yes, there are
> things that do this, but we need to do better. No, there's no committee to
> decide and yes the best way to do it is to do it, even if it's very low-tech.)
We need well documented user reports on the available tools rather than just 
'choose the option that works for you' ... I have yet to find a routing package 
that gives SAFE directions on UK motorways! This was the whole reason for my 
closer investigation.

> Tom
>
> On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Lester Caine <lester at lsces.co.uk
> <mailto:lester at lsces.co.uk>> wrote:
>
>     With the arrival of a 'new' set of controls, and the discussion on front
>     page, I feel that it IS necessary to open this discussion a little wider.
>     Having been using the new interface on mobile devices I find it much less
>     usable than the older set-up. But that is not to say that the old one was
>     actually usable! There is a need for a different map interface that works
>     better with mobile devices. Even the routing demos have mixed results on
>     tablets and mobile phones. I've been working on my own 'front end' simply to
>     provide one that I can tailor for the devices I am using. The old N900 used
>     to work well, but the newer devices are difficult to use 'on the go'. As an
>     example, the old TomTom sat nav was easy to use while driving, but the
>     current replacements I've tried to use with the Galaxy4 can be dangerous at
>     times as they wander off doing their own thing, and you have to stop to get
>     back to a state where you can continue following the route.
>
>     It's obvious that the new map interface is not designed for mobile devices,
>     so where should we discuss that development and how it would fit in with an
>     improved front end. It's not just a matter of directing to 'a map' but more
>     important is directing to safe options for those of us who ARE using the
>     tools every day. The current options are both difficult to find, and have
>     clear information on how safe they are when using them live! Disclaimers of
>     accepting no responsibility may cover any legal liability, but essentially
>     say 'here is a tool - but you should never use it!'
>
>     And discussion on a more open platform would also be appreciated rather than
>     on development platforms that we do not subscribe to because we use
>     different development tools!

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk