On this topic, there has been concern over validators doing so much deletion of 
recently mapped objects.  This triggers a few monitoring sites that watch for 
'suspicious changesets'; it doesn't mean much in the immediate, but thinking 
longer term for the OSM project, those algorithms could be used for automatic 
warnings or blocks.  I think no matter what, we're always going to be dealing 
with poor mapping, so we should also look at some best practices/rules of thumb 
for when to delete versus improve a previously mapped feature.  Although I do 
find myself deleting and re-drawing sometimes, I try to minimize that as there 
is something to preserving the original mappers contribution.  This can also be 
an issue for trying to calculate mappers contributions for a mapathon or 
project if a validator unnecessarily deletes the objects.

To quickly touch on project creation; I think roads and settlements/residential 
areas go well together - they both should be done with larger task squares than 
for building projects, but not sure it matters too much which one comes first, 
but for disaster response as an example, I would think roads and settlements 
are first priority followed by buildings.

Happy Mapping,
=Russ

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Buck [mailto:andrew.r.b...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2017 10:20 AM
To: hot@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [HOT] Could we get more out of our mappers by asking for less?

> I think this is a different conversation, I would prefer mappers take a
> little more time and care, some buildings I've seen mapped have little
> relationship to the size or shape of the building.
> 
> Cheerio John

I agree on this.  Especially with respect to buildings.  Roads are
fairly easy to add refinements to by doing them one at a time and using
the replace geometry tool in JOSM, however poorly mapped buildings take
longer to clean up than simply deleting them and mapping them fresh.

I would rather see a user add 10 buildings that are high quality then
100 or even 1000 that have to be remapped by someone else.  Having to
map something that has already been mapped poorly by someone else is
really disheartening.  On the one hand you spend your whole time mapping
thinking about how your work is duplicating that of someone else, and on
the other hand you feel bad about removing their contribution from the
database.  So you get hit with it on both fronts.

-AndrewBuck




_______________________________________________
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Reply via email to