I wholeheartedly agree that it takes experts to get #2 going and that this is an essential step for #3 to take place which can be crowdsourced. But to say that the success in Haiti was not largely due to 'crowd-sourced action' is simply inaccurate. Christopher or others can prepare imagery all they like, but it takes many hands to digitize from it in an efficient manner. Both were absolutely required and the former sure as hell does take an expert with alot of time on his hands (thank you Chris!!) or tools built by experts.
Jeff On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 2:14 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jun 16, 2010, at 4:57 PM, ext Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > >>> Seriously... Chris' point is valid. What happened in Haiti was no >>> accident. Nor was it really a "crowd sourced action". We see the same >>> half+dozen or so people in pivotal positions in almost all of these >>> "neogeography" actions. >> >> This is patently false. Surely, Chris' efforts to prepare data were no >> 'accident', but the 1000s of people who *used* this imagery to edit >> OSM and the use of OSM by groups like Ushahidi etc sure as hell were >> *crowd sourced action*. > > Crowd sourced action couldn't take place until those maps existed. > That's the "#2" in my previous email. #3 can be crowd sourced. (#2 > could be either done by smart people in the field, or done by tools > written by smart people.) > > In order for crowd sourcing to take place, you need someone with > geo/GIS experience *and* community knowledge/experience to connect > the dots. At some point, tools/best practices may simplify #2 until > it can be done by non-experts. We're not there yet. > > Regards, > -- > Christopher Schmidt > Nokia > > _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
