Hi, A distinction between field notes and armchair IMHO goes too far. Instead a kind of "field flag" might help, which can be seen as "this note has to be reviewed by someone with detailled on-the-ground knowledge or being present on the ground".
On the other hand there's the "problem" of an increasing number of notes. I see two different problems here. 1) Too many notes I cannot solve: Motivation goes down, and I start to close notes just to get rid of them although they are neither solved nor correctly identified as being invalid. This is an individual problem for each (maintaining) mapper. I would like to see something like "hide this node for me", perhaps with an optional "...until it is changed or commented by someone else". This would allow armchair mappers to "clean up" the notes as far as possible without being disturbed by irrelevant notes being processed already. 2) What is the purpose of notes? There are private notes of mappers for themself to fix problems later; often these aren't explained in detail as the mapper relies on his memory to understand it. Those might be solved by allowing "private notes" as mentioned by others. There are "bug notes", where something is wrong in the map in contrast to "missing notes", where something is missing. Both may be valuable, some for locals, some for armchair mappers, some for both, and others for nobody. The distinction between "armchair" and "field" is difficult. Of course there are Germans or HOT-people who "armchair-map" somewhere else in the world or something like that, but I don't think it would solve the issue. I think, although those don't call themself armchair-mappers, most of these issues arise where someone checks his own city, or the region around for bugs. Bugs where the mapper might go to in the field if necessary, if not now, then in the next weeks or months, becoming a field mapper by doing that. Moreover most armchair mappers (I hope) are field mappers in their local area. It would therefore require to decide about "my own field mapping area" versus "the rest of the world" to show or hide the one or the other set of nodes. To conclude: I think there's the chance for improvement of the notes system, but closing notes should be done with care, and only where it is clear that the note is either solved or unsolvable/wrong. regards Peter Am 10.08.2014 um 14:10 schrieb Matthijs Melissen: > I see a lot of comments like this. The underlying problem seems to be > that it is not clear whether notes are meant for armchair mappers, or > for surveyors in the field. > > I think both types of notes are useful: that way the notes can serve > as a two-way communication between mappers in the field (for example > novices who don't know how to edit the map themselves) and armchair > mappers (who might want to communicate with mappers in the field if > they are unable to do a field check themselves at that moment). > > So the solution might be very simple: make two types of notes, 'desk' > notes and 'field' notes. The desk notes can be handled by armchair > mappers. The field notes need a check in the field. Notes created by > anonymous users should be desk notes by default, and if information is > missing, the armchair mapper should be able to turn it into a field > note. > > The notes JB refers seem to be field-type notes. I think they are > useful, and I think it's not helpful if armchair mappers try to close > all of them without doing a survey. > > Anyone think a split in field and desk notes is a good idea? > Implementation of this should be easy. > > -- Matthijs > > On 10 August 2014 11:50, JB <jb...@mailoo.org> wrote: >> Hello, >> I think I will reopen the debate here, by asking a simple question: how many >> of those saying "hey, let this note open, it does no harm to anybody" have >> actually browsed a country for its opened notes and tried to close them? How >> many have done the same with openstreetbugs during its last year of life? >> If you have not, let me tell you, loud and clear: the note database will >> become unusable soon. When you browse 10 notes and are forced to leave 9 >> open because it does provide no clean information, you just stop trying. >> That is why during OSB close up, I found so many notes of that kind >> (continue the path, this is wrong, this does not exist, etc.), that where >> just not clear enough, or where just too old (the correction had been done >> without OSB), and most of them where more than 2 years old. And this is why >> OSB was a mess in the end. >> I have tried to keep the DB clean in France, am still trying by beeing less >> narrow-minded, but I just see its quality decreasing every day. >> So I do not have the exact number, but adding some 10s of little valued >> notes every week saying "this speed limit may be wrong", some of them added >> by error (not along a highway) does not seem an improvement to the notes DB >> to me. >> JB. >> >> >> Le 10/08/2014 09:42, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : >> >>> >>>> Il giorno 09/ago/2014, alle ore 13:56, Norbert Wenzel >>>> <norbert.wenzel.li...@gmail.com> ha scritto: >>>> >>>> just seeing these notes along a >>>> motorway every few kilometers. And since these messages don't tell what >>>> the actual speed limit should be and where it starts it gets really >>>> annoying to close all these automatically generated notes. >>> >>> >>> why are you closing them, if you can't solve the issue? I would keep them >>> open, if you are not sure that the limit is correct in OSM >>> >>> cheers, >>> Martin >>> _______________________________________________ >>> talk mailing list >>> talk@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
