On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:01 PM, David Schmitt <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2012-08-15 21:57, Donald Noble wrote: >> >> 1. Highlighting of priority or important areas by a co-ordinator would >> be nice to have, but not essential. > > > Recent TM versions allow non-rectangular Jobs. Within the job a descriptive > description is usually sufficient. It's not like the city in the center > could be missed, no? > > >> 2. Being able to pick an area, especially next to the one you have >> already mapped is (IMO) essential, as there may be features that go >> between them that you have partially mapped in the first task, and >> would like to continue mapping. Therefore an automated selection >> process would be counterproductive IMO. > > > That is right. Sometimes I let the machine choose, to avoid making a > decision and sometimes I want to pick a specific, interesting location. > > Re: features crossing the task boundary: I usually complete them in the > context of my current task, if they do not reach too far into the next task. > > >> 3. A multi-stage completion process could be useful. For example, if >> the most important thing is to map the main roads and residential >> areas, these could be completed and the square marked as 'level1 >> complete' and you could move on to another area. Once most/all of the >> areas have the basic items mapped, you (or someone else) could return >> and add in supplementary data like buildings, footpaths, land use etc. >> I sometimes feel reticent to mark a square as complete if others are >> mapping every building but I have not (even if the task is only to add >> roads and residential areas). The key part of the task is complete, >> but the area is not fully mapped. > > > I often wondered about that too. Most of the recent building trace jobs > drive me out of my mind because I can't wrap my head around tagging clumps > of pixels as huts. Then again, I'd probably also be of no use if I just map > the roads and keep all the fun for myself, leaving others to struggle with > the buildings. > > I guess that's a loose-loose situation right there. > > > On a similar tangent, it would be really great to have a global TM with > finishing levels which keeps track of up-to-date-ness, complete-ness and > data fidelity.
Can you please elaborate? > > >> 4a. I don't know if it would be possible to set up the task with >> different sized grids in urban areas. Say for example a 1km grid over >> the wider area, but with each 1km square split into 4, 9, or 16 >> smaller squares in dense areas? > > > Pierre, you're already working on that? Great! would it be possible for > mappers to dynamically split tasks? or will the admin have to do that? > Anyways, looking forward to that! This is already available on the current TM. There's a small button at the bottom of the task tab when you take one. Each user is allowed to split tasks. No admin user contribution is required here. > > > > Best Regards, David > > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot -- ------------------------------------------------------------- | Pierre GIRAUD | http://pierrelebricoleur.blogspot.com | http://www.flickr.com/photos/pierregiraud ------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
