Hi Pierre, I think it is a requirement to validate tiles. Yes we haven't figured out how to get people to do it, but I think that is an instructional issue. Perhaps if the validators were given access to a greater number of tiles to validate at a time. Maybe they could pick multiple tiles at once.
Long-term I'd like to see the workflow so that you can define the steps a task goes through. Meaning I could say I want all squares to go through the following phases. Map the roads -> map the buildings -> validate. Then another task could have a complete different set of phases. Map the residential areas -> map the water ways -> map the roads. We haven't quite figured out the validation yet, but it is important. -Kate On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 4:30 AM, Pierre GIRAUD <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok, I've gone further with my experimentations. > I'm really not satisfied with the validation workflow and I've tried to > change it completely. > > I'm convinced that it's not really a requirement to be able to "validate" > tiles. It appears (looking at the statistics) that very few tiles have been > marked as valid in the past jobs. I suppose that's because validation itself > is not easy. It's easy to tell that a tile in invalid though. Thus, it's > really a requirement to be able to "invalidate" tiles. > In the version currently installed on dev server, the "validation" button > doesn't exist anymore. The tiles can now take only 2 statuses "done" or "not > done". Colors have been changed too. They're now more "common" to people's > habits and they match the buttons colors too. > Also, there's no need to lock a tile to tell it's invalidate. I think this > should be a quick process. > > I intend to add a "message box". Users could for example receive messages > from the application to be informed that a tile they previously worked on > has been invalidated. > > One other thing I changed is the "users tab". I simplified things by > removing the numbers telling how much the users worked. As someone already > told me, this is not a race. We don't need a winner. > What I added though is the availability to see which tiles the given users > worked on by highlighting them on the map. This feature has been asked > several times. > > Once again, feedbacks are welcome. > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Augustin Doury <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Sorry for this second email, I just want to add something about this point >> of my last email : >> >> 1) Limit how many times you could split the tasks, for a zoom level of 17, >> maybe not more than once. >> > sometimes tasks are splitted twice or more, it really slows the mapping. >> >> On the "users" page,the number of tiles done by a contributor could depend >> on the size of the tiles he has done : >> - if he did not split tiles, show "1" for one tile >> - if he did, show "0,25" for one tile which is from a tile splitted once. >> >> Augustin >> >> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Augustin Doury >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi! Couple things I realized this morning using the Tasking Manager : >>> >>> 1) Limit how many times you could split the tasks, for a zoom level of >>> 17, maybe not more than once. >>> > sometimes tasks are splitted twice or more, it really slows the >>> > mapping. >>> >>> 2) Make it easy to find which task you're working on, >>> In the current version all "current worked on" tasks are highlighted in >>> orange, maybe the task linked to your OSM account could be highlighted in an >>> other colour. >>> >>> 3) It's too easy to delete a task, it could be great to add one step more >>> for security checking >>> >>> Great to imagine how the new version will be! >>> >>> Augustin >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 9:39 PM, Augustin Doury >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks for that Pierre! Here are some comments : >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 8:18 PM, Pierre GIRAUD <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - with this in mind, tiles url (in the address bar) can be used to be >>>>> shared to someone else. This might be useful to use a tile as reference >>>>> in a >>>>> discussion between mappers, >>>> >>>> >>>> > this is a real enhancement, especially with new mappers who want to >>>> > have their work checked or to share it easily. I would use it like every >>>> > week. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - comments are now required when marking a task as done or >>>>> (in)validating one, >>>> >>>> >>>> > great, it could be good to have an informative message to explain what >>>> > kind of comment is expected, >>>> > maybe the person who create the job could choose this informative >>>> > message. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> - users have access to the tile change history. >>>> >>>> >>>> > this is a real enhancement too I think >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please write down any problems you see and your good or bad feelings. >>>> >>>> >>>> Something that could be great on the Tasking Manager's "users" page : >>>> >>>> By clicking on the OSMid of a contributor or a validator, be able to : >>>> >>>> - know which tile he has edited >>>> - know which tile he has marked as "done" >>>> - which tile he has validated >>>> - and be able to select it easily and open it in "read-only" mode. >>>> Great for quality assurance with new mappers, and great to find which >>>> tile you have worked on yesterday. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> Off topic question: >>>>> I'm not sure how important the locking is when an advanced user wants >>>>> to (in)validate the work done on a job. >>>>> How about allowing validation without any lock. Or maybe we should >>>>> rethink the validation process. >>>>> Any thoughts? >>>> >>>> >>>> > when a new register click on a task marked as done, he uses to >>>> > validate or invalidate it quickly and don't think to just click on >>>> > "unlock-it"... >>>> I think a new validation process could be great, let it open for >>>> everybody but be sure that all validators did it in an informed way and >>>> don't validate or invalidate a task by mistake. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Pierre >>>>> >>>>> [1] http://tasks-dev.hotosm.org >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> | Pierre GIRAUD >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> HOT mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Augustin Doury >>>> Openstreetmap Senegal Community Mobilizer >>>> Humanitarian Openstreetmap Team (HOT) >>>> +221773160902 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +221773160902 >>>> end_of_the_skype_highlighting begin_of_the_skype_highlighting >>>> +221773160902 end_of_the_skype_highlighting >>>> begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +221773160902 >>>> end_of_the_skype_highlighting >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Augustin Doury >>> Openstreetmap Senegal Community Mobilizer >>> Humanitarian Openstreetmap Team (HOT) >>> +221773160902 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +221773160902 >>> end_of_the_skype_highlighting begin_of_the_skype_highlighting >>> +221773160902 end_of_the_skype_highlighting >>> begin_of_the_skype_highlighting +221773160902 >>> end_of_the_skype_highlighting >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Augustin Doury >> Openstreetmap Senegal Community Mobilizer >> Humanitarian Openstreetmap Team (HOT) >> +221773160902 > > > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------- > | Pierre GIRAUD > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > _______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
