Hi Folks,


I am a retired long time map user, occasional mapper (in QGIS, Mapinfo) and 
supporter of the OSM mapping project. It seems to me that the issue of poor 
mapping, especially for HOT projects, is coming up on such a regular basis that 
it's time to consider some mandatory training for users before they get to map 
under the HOT task manager. I don't think this would be too difficult for most 
volunteers and it could ensure that at least a certain level of competency is 
attained before being exposed to complex tasks. If people know that in the 
first place then they can make a choice as to whether they commence or continue 
to map.


I have no idea how this could be accomplished as I know little of the linkages 
between OSM and the HOT Task Manager, but restricting HOT tasks to those with 
some defined training could improve the results.


Let's say as a minimum you train folks on roads and residential area polygons - 
that might be level 1 (ID Editor)

Level 2 could be after training for buildings, tracks, paths (ID or JOSM)

Level 3 for validation (JOSM)


In this way HOT tasks simply get assigned at each level and you know you have 
the right people doing the tasks at hand. The task manager could also only 
highlight jobs at their assigned level until they do the next level training.


You might even consider, as part of validation, dropping people from a higher 
level to a lower level if they continually fail to produce results at the 
desired consistency.


Just my thoughts as a casual mapper.



Cheers - Phil


 <http://www.thingreenline.org.au/> Thin Green Line Supporter, Volunteer Mapper 
(GISMO) -  <http://www.redcross.org.au/volunteering.aspx> Red Cross 



From: Severin Menard [mailto:severin.men...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 4:34 AM
To: hot@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve


The edits on hotosm.org job #2228 <http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/2228>  have 
started and now happens what I feared. There is no mention of what are the 
necessary skills and newbies are coming with a lot of enthusiasm but with 
almost no OSM experience. A quick analysis of the first 29 contributors shows 
that 20 of them have created their OSM account less than one month ago. Some 
did it yesterday or today. Wow. 

The result of that : obviously, crappy edits are coming, spoiling what we have 
been doing over the last few days : now we have building as nodes where shapes 
are totally visible, un-squared bad shaped buildings and the main landuse area 
is self-cutting in various places (see there 
<https://leslibresgeographes.org/jirafeau/f.php?h=26gWjHki&p=1> ). 

Nothing new under the sun : it was already the case for Haiti EarthQuake 2010. 
Quite a pity that six years after, despite the OSM tools have improved a lot, 
it remains the same. It is though quite simple to fix the most part of it: 

I guess some will argue that the OSM newcomers are people of good will and that 
they just want to help and that they my feel offended/discouraged. Of course 
their intentions are high and yes they may feel a bit hurt. But this is really 
a classic in humanitarian response: people with the best intentions in the 
world may not fit for it, just because they are not experienced yet. 


Mapping in OSM in crisis response is not an exciting one-shot hobby : it does 
have its learning curve and it is key to learn how to map correctly before 
being dropped over complex humanitarian contexts. This is why I mentioned three 
sets of necessary skills for the jobs I created these last days on 
http://taches.francophonelibre.org. And the beginner mappers who joined the job 
that fitted for beginners are people that already have a few months of OSM 
experience, not newcomers. Newcomers should be driven over non urgent fields.

If someone is not interested to learn first in not a mass media covered crisis 
context : this is not a problem, it is actually a good way to see real 
motivations. I personally prefer to get one mapper that will become a huge, 
excellent contributor, 3-4 more occasional but still producing neat data, than 
to lose 10 that would create crappy objects and just leave forever afterwards 


I guess the resulting need of duplicating the number of necessary edits (crappy 
ones then corrections) to get a clean data is a rather a good way to grow the 
number of total contributors and the number of total edits created through the 
# of the HOT TM instance that seems to be so important for the board of HOT US 
Inc (two current directors have contacted me for this purpose) to make 
communication and raise funds from the figures. But what is at stake here is to 
provide good baseline data for humanitarian response, not distorted metrics.


HOT mailing list

Reply via email to