I like this idea a lot. Having a validation system based on some kind of voting. I think it could work well.
As Theodin says, we could have users that look at a tile and say "looks good to me". Once you have three of these, you mark the tile as validated. You can also have "special" users that can invalidate and/or validate in one click. There could be also a per-task configurable threshold. So for tasks with many users the task admin can put an higher number of votes to validate and have a better confidence in the data. Other tasks could have just one vote needed, reverting to how the system currently works. About invalidation: I am not so confident that a down-voting system could work. I would prefer that an experienced mapper has the ability to invalidate if he sees something wrong. Some experimentation could be needed. Thanks, Daniele On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 09:13:23AM +0100, Theodin wrote: > Another idea: > > Maybe we could dothe process like Kort (OSM gamification > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kort_Game ) does it. There, several > people must check a certain > thing and after three sucessfull checks it gets accepted into OSM. That would > be like a 2-step > validation: > first other mappers validate a tile 2-3 times > second an experienced mapper validates it again blocks it and marks it as > done. > > But maybe this process is too much work. > > Regards, > Theodin > > > Am 04.02.2014 00:38, schrieb Severin MENARD: > > > > > > Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 05:46:50 -0800 (PST) > > From: Mikel Maron <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > To: Pierre GIRAUD <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>>, HOT Openstreetmap > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > Subject: Re: [HOT] Tech WG - tasking manager - workflow branch > > Message-ID: > > <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > Pierre > > > > Thanks for the update, great to hear about the progress and new UI > > features.? > > > > So I'm clear, you're talking about > > merging?https://github.com/pgiraud/osm-tasking-manager/tree/workflow > > into?https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager > > > > <https://github.com/pgiraud/osm-tasking-manager/tree/workflowinto?https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager> > > ? > > > > And by v2, are we talking about this version? > > https://github.com/pgiraud/osm-tasking-manager2 > > > > > > On validation, I agree it needs a rethink. There is definitely a need > > for validation in some > > form. But I'd hesitate to remove functionality, the current validation > > without replacing it > > with something else. I suggest we keep it for now, and move on > > discussion of what this should > > really look like. > > > > > > From my experience over the last months I would say the validation is > > two-folds: > > - by task to review what each contributor did. The green step would be good > > ONLY IF IT COULD BE > > INVALIDATED. Currently once validated, it cannot be revert and the task > > cannot be selected > > anymore. This is really a pain as some mappers validate tasks that are far > > for being done. I must > > also confess I validated one or two tasks by accident myself. Is it not > > possible to easily remove > > this blocking feature and make the validation reverted if needed? > > - over the whole mapped area, to harmonize the mapping and set a coherent > > road network. For more > > details, refer to the discussion I had on this list with Nick Allen a few > > weeks ago. Create a > > wikipage on this is still on my todo list. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Severin > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > HOT mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot > > _______________________________________________ > HOT mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot -- Daniele Venzano http://www.brownhat.org _______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
