Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[Walker Bradley]

Dear All,

There have been two responses to mine about a building editor.  I apologize for 
the confusion and I do not advocate for a separate building, nor does anyone 
else.  I’ve moved my discussion to the appropriate slack channel.  Thank you 
for the links.

Best,

Walker

On Dec 13, 2017, at 06:03, Benoit Fournier 
> wrote:


Hi all,

I think people interested in the subject of a building tool in iD should read a 
few pages (if not already found and read):

- View of the maintener 
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/528#issuecomment-346234741

- First coding attempt https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/pull/2699

- Ongoing effort 
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/528#issuecomment-348757239


I don't think it is a good idea to create yet another editor only specialised 
in building. I very much favour the improvement on existing iD.

For what it worth, I would personally rank a few options here:

1. Building tool within ordinary iD + Custom iD presets for Tasking Manager 
projects https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2656#issuecomment-192904617

2. Building tool within ordinary iD

3. Status quo

4. Forked iD editor

5. Yet another editor, building-only.


On a final but lengthy note, I must stress I do not think it is a good idea to 
further separate [Tasking Manager][HOT][humanitarian][projects]-style mapping 
and general OpenStreetMap mapping. I like general set of tools and 
documentation that can be used for all kinds of purposes.

LearnOSM and Tasking Manager are (in my view) good examples of projects that 
already benefit both HOT-centric mappers and general OSM contributors. I think 
we must draw a line when a proposition becomes too HOT-specific *and* at the 
expense of the general OSM project. For clarity: I would be opposed to the 
development of yet another editing tool or an over-emphasis on humanitarian 
mapping in generic modules of LearnOSM.

Please understand: I think HOT must be a sub-part of OSM, a part of the 
ecosystem, not a separate or oblivious organisation. I feel *this* is an 
important part about "HOT's reputation in OSM", as much as data quality.

And about people. The long-term objective of HOT, or Missing Maps, or partner 
NGOs, is (I hope...) *not* to gather an army of robot-like contributors (or 
"mechanical Turk"-like) that trace only buildings. It should be rather to 
introduce new people to OSM and turn some of them into good OSM citizens and 
contributors, ready for long-term mapping and validation, for local mapping & 
local empowerment, remote projects & data quality, group activations & crisis 
assistance.

Cheers,

-- althio aka Ben
previously active in LearnOSM and HOT Training Group


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

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[Benoit Fournier]

Hi all,

I think people interested in the subject of a building tool in iD should
read a few pages (if not already found and read):

- View of the maintener
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/528#issuecomment-346234741

- First coding attempt https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/pull/2699

- Ongoing effort
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/528#issuecomment-348757239


I don't think it is a good idea to create yet another editor only
specialised in building. I very much favour the improvement on existing iD.

For what it worth, I would personally rank a few options here:

1. Building tool within ordinary iD + Custom iD presets for Tasking Manager
projects
https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/2656#issuecomment-192904617

2. Building tool within ordinary iD

3. Status quo

4. Forked iD editor

5. Yet another editor, building-only.

On a final but lengthy note, I must stress I do not think it is a good idea
to further separate [Tasking Manager][HOT][humanitarian][projects]-style
mapping and general OpenStreetMap mapping. I like general set of tools and
documentation that can be used for all kinds of purposes.

LearnOSM and Tasking Manager are (in my view) good examples of projects
that already benefit both HOT-centric mappers and general OSM contributors.
I think we must draw a line when a proposition becomes too HOT-specific
*and* at the expense of the general OSM project. For clarity: I would be
opposed to the development of yet another editing tool or an over-emphasis
on humanitarian mapping in generic modules of LearnOSM.

Please understand: I think HOT must be a sub-part of OSM, a part of the
ecosystem, not a separate or oblivious organisation. I feel *this* is an
important part about "HOT's reputation in OSM", as much as data quality.

And about people. The long-term objective of HOT, or Missing Maps, or
partner NGOs, is (I hope...) *not* to gather an army of robot-like
contributors (or "mechanical Turk"-like) that trace only buildings. It
should be rather to introduce new people to OSM and turn some of them into
good OSM citizens and contributors, ready for long-term mapping and
validation, for local mapping & local empowerment, remote projects & data
quality, group activations & crisis assistance.
Cheers,

-- althio aka Ben
previously active in LearnOSM and HOT Training Group
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[john whelan]

Can this be packaged up in a format that cynical OSM mappers can absorb?

I'm thinking not glossy with smiling faces but a note in their OSM diary
that we can draw to the attention of OSMWEEKLY.  Possibly through a post on
the osmtalk titled something like "local mapping after HOT"?

Compose it in a word processor first.

ie get the local mapper to tell the tale of how working with HOT / MSF led
to other things.

This I think is worth it's weight in gold and many brownie points.

Thanks John

On 12 Dec 2017 7:06 pm, "Pete Masters"  wrote:

> Apologies for going back to an earlier point, but i think yes there are
> examples. The OSM Bangladesh crew, while not without original, local
> catalysts, had a resurgence after a HOT project with MSF. While the project
> was very successful (and has had impact in terms of medical care in
> deprived areas of Dhaka), the really remarkable thing has been what has
> happened since, on a local and international scale. The passion of those
> individuals, some of whom had their first OSM experiences through HOT has
> led to collaborations with local communities, NGOs, businesses (who now
> employ OSM mappers), and conversations with local and national government
> departments. If anyone can talk to this question it is them.
>
> Plus, on the subject of WAMM, OSM data is now being used in a Ministry of
> Health hospital in Sierra Leone to improve surveillance and public health
> systems in the area. This is a local, institutional use case I have no
> idea if any of those mappers have gone on to enrich the map in other ways
> from there, but this is a big deal for local health infrastructure.
>
> Do we ask enough and learn enough from those involved in these examples?
> Probably not. But, good collaborations are happening. And, I think the
> microgrants programme is great. There will be some successes and,
> inevitably, some failures in the long term and we should not be complacent
> that they are a golden bullet, but I think overall this is a good HOT
> initiative
>
> I really appreciate this conversation and, personally, think it is a
> discussion that needs to be had... I'm glad it's resurfaced.
>
> Pete
>
> Ps. Sorry if the email is a bit rambling (it's late and I'm tired)!
>
>
> On 12 Dec 2017 00:43, "john whelan"  wrote:
>
> I accept what you say Ralph but the motorcycle project is being run by an
> conventional European or North American NGO.  It's organised mapping.
>
> >The result will be a dedicated group in each country that will continue
> the work, train more local people and expand the mapping community.
>
> So is there a way to get this message across?  Are there examples where
> after training they have enriched the map without being directed what to
> map?
>
> We've come a long way with the projects and maperthons simplifying and
> standardizing improving the training material, and giving feedback so the
> standard of mapping for new mappers is considerably higher than it has been
> in the past.
>
> The other part is are the locals trusting the map enough to use it for
> local government type work?
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 11 December 2017 at 19:31,  wrote:
>
>> John,
>>
>> I am not sure what you are trying to say, but to help you understand
>> “Microgrants” I can explain some of them to you.
>>
>>
>>
>> I am helping the WAMM (West African Motorbike Mappers) who are in Sierra
>> Leone. The lead for this was Ivan Gayton from Medicins sans Frontieres and
>> Rupert Alan (A regular attendee at The London Missing Maps Mapathons).
>>
>> https://africamotorcyclemapping.org/category/rupert-allan-consultant/
>>
>>
>>
>> They have supplied equipment and are training local people to travel
>> around Sierra Leone (at present they are working their way through the
>> Eastern Province and they have completed Kailahun District and almost
>> completed Kenema District) visiting every town, village, hamlet and
>> isolated dwellings taking gps readings to supply coordinates for the names
>> of each of these places, with data such as the presence of a water pump,
>> local market and health facilities. They download this information onto a
>> spreadsheet and I have been checking their work and adding these names and
>> data to OSM. This field work is continuing with local people even though
>> Rupert has moved on to Uganda https://africamotorcyclemappin
>> g.org/2017/11/11/exciting-new-job-motorcycle-mapping-refugee
>> -settlements-uganda/ and Ivan is in Tanzania with Rumani Huria.
>>
>>
>>
>> Another that I have been involved in is Janet Chapman (also an attendee
>> at the London Missing Maps Mapathons)  with Crowd2Map  in Tanzania where
>> she is training the local people to draw the maps themselves and add more
>> information and detail with local knowledge. Along with the help of the
>> Crowdsource community they have done an amazing job of helping to add to
>> the basic infrastructure of 

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[Pete Masters]

Apologies for going back to an earlier point, but i think yes there are
examples. The OSM Bangladesh crew, while not without original, local
catalysts, had a resurgence after a HOT project with MSF. While the project
was very successful (and has had impact in terms of medical care in
deprived areas of Dhaka), the really remarkable thing has been what has
happened since, on a local and international scale. The passion of those
individuals, some of whom had their first OSM experiences through HOT has
led to collaborations with local communities, NGOs, businesses (who now
employ OSM mappers), and conversations with local and national government
departments. If anyone can talk to this question it is them.

Plus, on the subject of WAMM, OSM data is now being used in a Ministry of
Health hospital in Sierra Leone to improve surveillance and public health
systems in the area. This is a local, institutional use case I have no
idea if any of those mappers have gone on to enrich the map in other ways
from there, but this is a big deal for local health infrastructure.

Do we ask enough and learn enough from those involved in these examples?
Probably not. But, good collaborations are happening. And, I think the
microgrants programme is great. There will be some successes and,
inevitably, some failures in the long term and we should not be complacent
that they are a golden bullet, but I think overall this is a good HOT
initiative

I really appreciate this conversation and, personally, think it is a
discussion that needs to be had... I'm glad it's resurfaced.

Pete

Ps. Sorry if the email is a bit rambling (it's late and I'm tired)!


On 12 Dec 2017 00:43, "john whelan"  wrote:

I accept what you say Ralph but the motorcycle project is being run by an
conventional European or North American NGO.  It's organised mapping.

>The result will be a dedicated group in each country that will continue
the work, train more local people and expand the mapping community.

So is there a way to get this message across?  Are there examples where
after training they have enriched the map without being directed what to
map?

We've come a long way with the projects and maperthons simplifying and
standardizing improving the training material, and giving feedback so the
standard of mapping for new mappers is considerably higher than it has been
in the past.

The other part is are the locals trusting the map enough to use it for
local government type work?

Cheerio John

On 11 December 2017 at 19:31,  wrote:

> John,
>
> I am not sure what you are trying to say, but to help you understand
> “Microgrants” I can explain some of them to you.
>
>
>
> I am helping the WAMM (West African Motorbike Mappers) who are in Sierra
> Leone. The lead for this was Ivan Gayton from Medicins sans Frontieres and
> Rupert Alan (A regular attendee at The London Missing Maps Mapathons).
>
> https://africamotorcyclemapping.org/category/rupert-allan-consultant/
>
>
>
> They have supplied equipment and are training local people to travel
> around Sierra Leone (at present they are working their way through the
> Eastern Province and they have completed Kailahun District and almost
> completed Kenema District) visiting every town, village, hamlet and
> isolated dwellings taking gps readings to supply coordinates for the names
> of each of these places, with data such as the presence of a water pump,
> local market and health facilities. They download this information onto a
> spreadsheet and I have been checking their work and adding these names and
> data to OSM. This field work is continuing with local people even though
> Rupert has moved on to Uganda https://africamotorcyclemappin
> g.org/2017/11/11/exciting-new-job-motorcycle-mapping-
> refugee-settlements-uganda/ and Ivan is in Tanzania with Rumani Huria.
>
>
>
> Another that I have been involved in is Janet Chapman (also an attendee at
> the London Missing Maps Mapathons)  with Crowd2Map  in Tanzania where she
> is training the local people to draw the maps themselves and add more
> information and detail with local knowledge. Along with the help of the
> Crowdsource community they have done an amazing job of helping to add to
> the basic infrastructure of Northern Tanzania
> https://crowd2map.wordpress.com/
>
>
>
> These projects have gained a foothold in very poor areas where technology
> is nowhere near as advanced as you are used to, they have started the
> process and they are quite keen to keep the momentum going. The result will
> be a dedicated group in each country that will continue the work, train
> more local people and expand the mapping community. Even Katmandu Living
> Labs was a small group in the beginning.
>
>
>
> And for your information Rebecca Firth is another one who attended the
> London Missing Maps Mapathons. So Mapathons are a valuable way of finding
> people who are prepared to get more involved and actively improve OSM
> 

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[Blake Girardot HOT/OSM]

Hi Walker,

There is a renewed effort that I think has a good chance of success at
building a tool into the iD editor where it is most needed.

I am not sure a stand alone editor is a good idea for a couple of reasons
and think integrating a tool into the iD editor is by far the best solution.

If anyone wants to be a part of the current effort to build it into iD or
contribute to iD in general just join the OSM general slack at
https://osmus-slack.herokuapp.com/

Cheers
blake



<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail_term=icon>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Walker Bradley <wbrad...@worldbank.org>
wrote:

> Dear All,
>
>
> There has been a lot of back and forth regarding the utility of a
> specialized building editor in iD editor.  Many have mentioned how they
> would like it, but lack the skills in designing it.  How much would it cost
> to hire someone to program this, How would it be integrated with the
> existing editor and What would the skills required be for the person(s)?
>
>
> Best,
>
>
> Walker
>
>
> --
> *From:* john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 12, 2017 09:24
> *To:* Rory McCann
> *Cc:* HOT
> *Subject:* Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM
>
> A specialised buildings editor idea has a lot of merit.  Less to train,
> fewer options to go wrong.  Background upload after each building or set
> time.
>
> The problem with Bjorn's idea is unfortunately anyone can lead a
> maperthon.  The HOT Training group meets regularly and at least one of the
> members has a lot of experience leading maperthons.
>
> My perception is the regular ones have fewer problems its the ones being
> led by well meaning people with no experience in OSM mapping who don't read
> the instructions first and give incorrect instructions to mappers.
>
> Locally we had one very well meaning person but unfortunately the mappers
> edited the map and introduced a fairly large number of errors.  It was
> caught and many changes were reversed but that caused more problems as the
> students had been given the task as an assignment and some of their edits
> had disappeared.  It did all get straightened out eventually.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 12 December 2017 at 08:31, Rory McCann <r...@technomancy.org> wrote:
>
> It seems like there is a need for a specialized "buildings editor". Yes
> JOSM building_tools beats iD now, but how about making a new web based
> editor that addresses the problems you highlight:
>
>  * Can only enter buildings
>  * Uploads (& downloads) frequently. Potlatch used to upload as soon as
> you had deselected an object. OSM changesets can be opened and have many
> uploads. Why not upload every X minutes?
>  * Rather than free form drawing, you can only draw rectangular buildings
>  * Don't allow the user over lap buildings (or auto-merge the rectangles
> together)
>
> If you know your users are doing one thing, then it's probably easier to
> change the software than the users. 
>
> Of course, suggesting things is easier than actually doing them, and I
> don't think my JS is good enough to do it.
>
>
> On 09/12/17 20:59, john whelan wrote:
>
> Recently there has been some discussion of HOT's input into OpenStreetMap
> in the OSMF mailing list.
>
> Perhaps one of the problem areas is mapping that is less than ideal.
>
> Basically HOT mainly maps highways, landuse=residential and buildings.
>
> These shouldn't be difficult to map correctly.
>
> Buildings appear to be the most problematic.
>
> I think we need to think about why we are mapping them.  Is node good
> enough?  There would be less room for mistakes.
>
> If we need outlines and there good reasons why an outline is more valuable
> than a node then we need to define what is acceptable.  Or do we even
> care?  and its the do we even care part that is perceived to be the case by
> some within OSM and that perception is something we should care about.
>
>  From a validation point of view does it matter if the building is not
> square?  Is it acceptable to square a building even though we know this
> will introduce an element of approximation or error.
>
> What should be done with a building=yes that covers more than one
> building?  Do we expect the validator to map each building or just
> invalidate the tile?
>
> What should be done when the building mapped is more than 50% larger than
> the image?  Invalidate the tile?
>
> We a

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[Nate Smith]

If anyone would like to join the Tech Working Group meeting here in 10
mins, we can add this as a topic for discussion. I think it would be
worthwhile to also revisit discussions about integrating it into the iD
editor.

Tech WG meeting details: *15:00 UTC via Slack #hot_irc_channel* or through
IRC channel directly at irc://irc.oftc.net/hot.


Nate Smith
@nas_smith <https://twitter.com/nas_smith>

On December 12, 2017 at 8:44:08 AM, Walker Bradley (wbrad...@worldbank.org)
wrote:

Dear All,


There has been a lot of back and forth regarding the utility of a
specialized building editor in iD editor.  Many have mentioned how they
would like it, but lack the skills in designing it.  How much would it cost
to hire someone to program this, How would it be integrated with the
existing editor and What would the skills required be for the person(s)?


Best,


Walker


--
*From:* john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Tuesday, December 12, 2017 09:24
*To:* Rory McCann
*Cc:* HOT
*Subject:* Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

A specialised buildings editor idea has a lot of merit.  Less to train,
fewer options to go wrong.  Background upload after each building or set
time.

The problem with Bjorn's idea is unfortunately anyone can lead a
maperthon.  The HOT Training group meets regularly and at least one of the
members has a lot of experience leading maperthons.

My perception is the regular ones have fewer problems its the ones being
led by well meaning people with no experience in OSM mapping who don't read
the instructions first and give incorrect instructions to mappers.

Locally we had one very well meaning person but unfortunately the mappers
edited the map and introduced a fairly large number of errors.  It was
caught and many changes were reversed but that caused more problems as the
students had been given the task as an assignment and some of their edits
had disappeared.  It did all get straightened out eventually.

Cheerio John

On 12 December 2017 at 08:31, Rory McCann <r...@technomancy.org> wrote:

It seems like there is a need for a specialized "buildings editor". Yes
JOSM building_tools beats iD now, but how about making a new web based
editor that addresses the problems you highlight:

 * Can only enter buildings
 * Uploads (& downloads) frequently. Potlatch used to upload as soon as
you had deselected an object. OSM changesets can be opened and have many
uploads. Why not upload every X minutes?
 * Rather than free form drawing, you can only draw rectangular buildings
 * Don't allow the user over lap buildings (or auto-merge the rectangles
together)

If you know your users are doing one thing, then it's probably easier to
change the software than the users. 

Of course, suggesting things is easier than actually doing them, and I
don't think my JS is good enough to do it.


On 09/12/17 20:59, john whelan wrote:

Recently there has been some discussion of HOT's input into OpenStreetMap
in the OSMF mailing list.

Perhaps one of the problem areas is mapping that is less than ideal.

Basically HOT mainly maps highways, landuse=residential and buildings.

These shouldn't be difficult to map correctly.

Buildings appear to be the most problematic.

I think we need to think about why we are mapping them.  Is node good
enough?  There would be less room for mistakes.

If we need outlines and there good reasons why an outline is more valuable
than a node then we need to define what is acceptable.  Or do we even
care?  and its the do we even care part that is perceived to be the case by
some within OSM and that perception is something we should care about.

 From a validation point of view does it matter if the building is not
square?  Is it acceptable to square a building even though we know this
will introduce an element of approximation or error.

What should be done with a building=yes that covers more than one
building?  Do we expect the validator to map each building or just
invalidate the tile?

What should be done when the building mapped is more than 50% larger than
the image?  Invalidate the tile?

We are still mapping buildings twice.  I suspect some mappers are not
uploading within two hours.  Getting mappers to upload every 30 minutes max
would go a long way to reduce this, extending the tile lock to four hours
would almost certainly eliminate it.  Recently on high priority project
I've seen in the order of a hundred buildings double mapped.  They have
been done within the last two weeks so it is an ongoing problem. There is a
new tool that detects these so they aren't the problem they once were but
someone has to run the tool.

If HOT could support a few more projects that were from the community on
the ground rather than the "We are the professionals we know what is best"
which appears to be perceived sometimes from the number of projects for the
RED Cross or other northern hemisphere charities that might also

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[Walker Bradley]

Dear All,


There has been a lot of back and forth regarding the utility of a specialized 
building editor in iD editor.  Many have mentioned how they would like it, but 
lack the skills in designing it.  How much would it cost to hire someone to 
program this, How would it be integrated with the existing editor and What 
would the skills required be for the person(s)?


Best,


Walker



From: john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 09:24
To: Rory McCann
Cc: HOT
Subject: Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

A specialised buildings editor idea has a lot of merit.  Less to train, fewer 
options to go wrong.  Background upload after each building or set time.

The problem with Bjorn's idea is unfortunately anyone can lead a maperthon.  
The HOT Training group meets regularly and at least one of the members has a 
lot of experience leading maperthons.

My perception is the regular ones have fewer problems its the ones being led by 
well meaning people with no experience in OSM mapping who don't read the 
instructions first and give incorrect instructions to mappers.

Locally we had one very well meaning person but unfortunately the mappers 
edited the map and introduced a fairly large number of errors.  It was caught 
and many changes were reversed but that caused more problems as the students 
had been given the task as an assignment and some of their edits had 
disappeared.  It did all get straightened out eventually.

Cheerio John

On 12 December 2017 at 08:31, Rory McCann 
<r...@technomancy.org<mailto:r...@technomancy.org>> wrote:
It seems like there is a need for a specialized "buildings editor". Yes
JOSM building_tools beats iD now, but how about making a new web based
editor that addresses the problems you highlight:

 * Can only enter buildings
 * Uploads (& downloads) frequently. Potlatch used to upload as soon as
you had deselected an object. OSM changesets can be opened and have many
uploads. Why not upload every X minutes?
 * Rather than free form drawing, you can only draw rectangular buildings
 * Don't allow the user over lap buildings (or auto-merge the rectangles
together)

If you know your users are doing one thing, then it's probably easier to
change the software than the users. 

Of course, suggesting things is easier than actually doing them, and I
don't think my JS is good enough to do it.


On 09/12/17 20:59, john whelan wrote:
Recently there has been some discussion of HOT's input into OpenStreetMap in 
the OSMF mailing list.

Perhaps one of the problem areas is mapping that is less than ideal.

Basically HOT mainly maps highways, landuse=residential and buildings.

These shouldn't be difficult to map correctly.

Buildings appear to be the most problematic.

I think we need to think about why we are mapping them.  Is node good enough?  
There would be less room for mistakes.

If we need outlines and there good reasons why an outline is more valuable than 
a node then we need to define what is acceptable.  Or do we even care?  and its 
the do we even care part that is perceived to be the case by some within OSM 
and that perception is something we should care about.

 From a validation point of view does it matter if the building is not square?  
Is it acceptable to square a building even though we know this will introduce 
an element of approximation or error.

What should be done with a building=yes that covers more than one building?  Do 
we expect the validator to map each building or just invalidate the tile?

What should be done when the building mapped is more than 50% larger than the 
image?  Invalidate the tile?

We are still mapping buildings twice.  I suspect some mappers are not uploading 
within two hours.  Getting mappers to upload every 30 minutes max would go a 
long way to reduce this, extending the tile lock to four hours would almost 
certainly eliminate it.  Recently on high priority project I've seen in the 
order of a hundred buildings double mapped.  They have been done within the 
last two weeks so it is an ongoing problem. There is a new tool that detects 
these so they aren't the problem they once were but someone has to run the tool.

If HOT could support a few more projects that were from the community on the 
ground rather than the "We are the professionals we know what is best" which 
appears to be perceived sometimes from the number of projects for the RED Cross 
or other northern hemisphere charities that might also help the reputation and 
relationship.

So two points here on one message first is can HOT's reputation be repaired and 
I suspect that is longer term problem that will take time and a lot of effort 
rather than a PR job.

Second would someone care to comment on what is acceptable mapping for a 
building and what guidelines can we give to validators?

Thanks John




___
HOT mai

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[john whelan]

A specialised buildings editor idea has a lot of merit.  Less to train,
fewer options to go wrong.  Background upload after each building or set
time.

The problem with Bjorn's idea is unfortunately anyone can lead a
maperthon.  The HOT Training group meets regularly and at least one of the
members has a lot of experience leading maperthons.

My perception is the regular ones have fewer problems its the ones being
led by well meaning people with no experience in OSM mapping who don't read
the instructions first and give incorrect instructions to mappers.

Locally we had one very well meaning person but unfortunately the mappers
edited the map and introduced a fairly large number of errors.  It was
caught and many changes were reversed but that caused more problems as the
students had been given the task as an assignment and some of their edits
had disappeared.  It did all get straightened out eventually.

Cheerio John

On 12 December 2017 at 08:31, Rory McCann  wrote:

> It seems like there is a need for a specialized "buildings editor". Yes
> JOSM building_tools beats iD now, but how about making a new web based
> editor that addresses the problems you highlight:
>
>  * Can only enter buildings
>  * Uploads (& downloads) frequently. Potlatch used to upload as soon as
> you had deselected an object. OSM changesets can be opened and have many
> uploads. Why not upload every X minutes?
>  * Rather than free form drawing, you can only draw rectangular buildings
>  * Don't allow the user over lap buildings (or auto-merge the rectangles
> together)
>
> If you know your users are doing one thing, then it's probably easier to
> change the software than the users. 
>
> Of course, suggesting things is easier than actually doing them, and I
> don't think my JS is good enough to do it.
>
>
> On 09/12/17 20:59, john whelan wrote:
>
>> Recently there has been some discussion of HOT's input into OpenStreetMap
>> in the OSMF mailing list.
>>
>> Perhaps one of the problem areas is mapping that is less than ideal.
>>
>> Basically HOT mainly maps highways, landuse=residential and buildings.
>>
>> These shouldn't be difficult to map correctly.
>>
>> Buildings appear to be the most problematic.
>>
>> I think we need to think about why we are mapping them.  Is node good
>> enough?  There would be less room for mistakes.
>>
>> If we need outlines and there good reasons why an outline is more
>> valuable than a node then we need to define what is acceptable.  Or do we
>> even care?  and its the do we even care part that is perceived to be the
>> case by some within OSM and that perception is something we should care
>> about.
>>
>>  From a validation point of view does it matter if the building is not
>> square?  Is it acceptable to square a building even though we know this
>> will introduce an element of approximation or error.
>>
>> What should be done with a building=yes that covers more than one
>> building?  Do we expect the validator to map each building or just
>> invalidate the tile?
>>
>> What should be done when the building mapped is more than 50% larger than
>> the image?  Invalidate the tile?
>>
>> We are still mapping buildings twice.  I suspect some mappers are not
>> uploading within two hours.  Getting mappers to upload every 30 minutes max
>> would go a long way to reduce this, extending the tile lock to four hours
>> would almost certainly eliminate it.  Recently on high priority project
>> I've seen in the order of a hundred buildings double mapped.  They have
>> been done within the last two weeks so it is an ongoing problem. There is a
>> new tool that detects these so they aren't the problem they once were but
>> someone has to run the tool.
>>
>> If HOT could support a few more projects that were from the community on
>> the ground rather than the "We are the professionals we know what is best"
>> which appears to be perceived sometimes from the number of projects for the
>> RED Cross or other northern hemisphere charities that might also help the
>> reputation and relationship.
>>
>> So two points here on one message first is can HOT's reputation be
>> repaired and I suspect that is longer term problem that will take time and
>> a lot of effort rather than a PR job.
>>
>> Second would someone care to comment on what is acceptable mapping for a
>> building and what guidelines can we give to validators?
>>
>> Thanks John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[Bjoern Hassler]

Dear friends,

I do think that quality assurance is important. That doesn't mean just
assuring how objects are mapped, but also quality assuring training and
mapathons. From my perspective (specialising in adult education) I'd say
there's a fair few things that could be done to improve outcomes from
mapathons, e.g. c.f. message on this list some time ago about a volunteer
wanting better feedback at mapathon (not have received much / any).

How about having a voice call for an an initial brainstorming, to see where
core issues are and how they could be address as a shared effort? Does
somebody want to coordinate a doodle for a possible time, or we do this as
the next community talk (as an "open meeting on improving quality" rather
than a talk)?

Bjoern


On 12 December 2017 at 14:31, Rory McCann  wrote:

> It seems like there is a need for a specialized "buildings editor". Yes
> JOSM building_tools beats iD now, but how about making a new web based
> editor that addresses the problems you highlight:
>
>  * Can only enter buildings
>  * Uploads (& downloads) frequently. Potlatch used to upload as soon as
> you had deselected an object. OSM changesets can be opened and have many
> uploads. Why not upload every X minutes?
>  * Rather than free form drawing, you can only draw rectangular buildings
>  * Don't allow the user over lap buildings (or auto-merge the rectangles
> together)
>
> If you know your users are doing one thing, then it's probably easier to
> change the software than the users. 
>
> Of course, suggesting things is easier than actually doing them, and I
> don't think my JS is good enough to do it.
>
>
> On 09/12/17 20:59, john whelan wrote:
>
>> Recently there has been some discussion of HOT's input into OpenStreetMap
>> in the OSMF mailing list.
>>
>> Perhaps one of the problem areas is mapping that is less than ideal.
>>
>> Basically HOT mainly maps highways, landuse=residential and buildings.
>>
>> These shouldn't be difficult to map correctly.
>>
>> Buildings appear to be the most problematic.
>>
>> I think we need to think about why we are mapping them.  Is node good
>> enough?  There would be less room for mistakes.
>>
>> If we need outlines and there good reasons why an outline is more
>> valuable than a node then we need to define what is acceptable.  Or do we
>> even care?  and its the do we even care part that is perceived to be the
>> case by some within OSM and that perception is something we should care
>> about.
>>
>>  From a validation point of view does it matter if the building is not
>> square?  Is it acceptable to square a building even though we know this
>> will introduce an element of approximation or error.
>>
>> What should be done with a building=yes that covers more than one
>> building?  Do we expect the validator to map each building or just
>> invalidate the tile?
>>
>> What should be done when the building mapped is more than 50% larger than
>> the image?  Invalidate the tile?
>>
>> We are still mapping buildings twice.  I suspect some mappers are not
>> uploading within two hours.  Getting mappers to upload every 30 minutes max
>> would go a long way to reduce this, extending the tile lock to four hours
>> would almost certainly eliminate it.  Recently on high priority project
>> I've seen in the order of a hundred buildings double mapped.  They have
>> been done within the last two weeks so it is an ongoing problem. There is a
>> new tool that detects these so they aren't the problem they once were but
>> someone has to run the tool.
>>
>> If HOT could support a few more projects that were from the community on
>> the ground rather than the "We are the professionals we know what is best"
>> which appears to be perceived sometimes from the number of projects for the
>> RED Cross or other northern hemisphere charities that might also help the
>> reputation and relationship.
>>
>> So two points here on one message first is can HOT's reputation be
>> repaired and I suspect that is longer term problem that will take time and
>> a lot of effort rather than a PR job.
>>
>> Second would someone care to comment on what is acceptable mapping for a
>> building and what guidelines can we give to validators?
>>
>> Thanks John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> HOT mailing list
>> HOT@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> HOT mailing list
> HOT@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[Rory McCann]

It seems like there is a need for a specialized "buildings editor". Yes
JOSM building_tools beats iD now, but how about making a new web based
editor that addresses the problems you highlight:

 * Can only enter buildings
 * Uploads (& downloads) frequently. Potlatch used to upload as soon as
you had deselected an object. OSM changesets can be opened and have many
uploads. Why not upload every X minutes?
 * Rather than free form drawing, you can only draw rectangular buildings
 * Don't allow the user over lap buildings (or auto-merge the rectangles
together)

If you know your users are doing one thing, then it's probably easier to
change the software than the users. 

Of course, suggesting things is easier than actually doing them, and I
don't think my JS is good enough to do it.

On 09/12/17 20:59, john whelan wrote:
Recently there has been some discussion of HOT's input into 
OpenStreetMap in the OSMF mailing list.


Perhaps one of the problem areas is mapping that is less than ideal.

Basically HOT mainly maps highways, landuse=residential and buildings.

These shouldn't be difficult to map correctly.

Buildings appear to be the most problematic.

I think we need to think about why we are mapping them.  Is node good 
enough?  There would be less room for mistakes.


If we need outlines and there good reasons why an outline is more 
valuable than a node then we need to define what is acceptable.  Or do 
we even care?  and its the do we even care part that is perceived to be 
the case by some within OSM and that perception is something we should 
care about.


 From a validation point of view does it matter if the building is not 
square?  Is it acceptable to square a building even though we know this 
will introduce an element of approximation or error.


What should be done with a building=yes that covers more than one 
building?  Do we expect the validator to map each building or just 
invalidate the tile?


What should be done when the building mapped is more than 50% larger 
than the image?  Invalidate the tile?


We are still mapping buildings twice.  I suspect some mappers are not 
uploading within two hours.  Getting mappers to upload every 30 minutes 
max would go a long way to reduce this, extending the tile lock to four 
hours would almost certainly eliminate it.  Recently on high priority 
project I've seen in the order of a hundred buildings double mapped.  
They have been done within the last two weeks so it is an ongoing 
problem. There is a new tool that detects these so they aren't the 
problem they once were but someone has to run the tool.


If HOT could support a few more projects that were from the community on 
the ground rather than the "We are the professionals we know what is 
best" which appears to be perceived sometimes from the number of 
projects for the RED Cross or other northern hemisphere charities that 
might also help the reputation and relationship.


So two points here on one message first is can HOT's reputation be 
repaired and I suspect that is longer term problem that will take time 
and a lot of effort rather than a PR job.


Second would someone care to comment on what is acceptable mapping for a 
building and what guidelines can we give to validators?


Thanks John




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





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

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[john whelan]

I accept what you say Ralph but the motorcycle project is being run by an
conventional European or North American NGO.  It's organised mapping.

>The result will be a dedicated group in each country that will continue
the work, train more local people and expand the mapping community.

So is there a way to get this message across?  Are there examples where
after training they have enriched the map without being directed what to
map?

We've come a long way with the projects and maperthons simplifying and
standardizing improving the training material, and giving feedback so the
standard of mapping for new mappers is considerably higher than it has been
in the past.

The other part is are the locals trusting the map enough to use it for
local government type work?

Cheerio John

On 11 December 2017 at 19:31,  wrote:

> John,
>
> I am not sure what you are trying to say, but to help you understand
> “Microgrants” I can explain some of them to you.
>
>
>
> I am helping the WAMM (West African Motorbike Mappers) who are in Sierra
> Leone. The lead for this was Ivan Gayton from Medicins sans Frontieres and
> Rupert Alan (A regular attendee at The London Missing Maps Mapathons).
>
> https://africamotorcyclemapping.org/category/rupert-allan-consultant/
>
>
>
> They have supplied equipment and are training local people to travel
> around Sierra Leone (at present they are working their way through the
> Eastern Province and they have completed Kailahun District and almost
> completed Kenema District) visiting every town, village, hamlet and
> isolated dwellings taking gps readings to supply coordinates for the names
> of each of these places, with data such as the presence of a water pump,
> local market and health facilities. They download this information onto a
> spreadsheet and I have been checking their work and adding these names and
> data to OSM. This field work is continuing with local people even though
> Rupert has moved on to Uganda https://africamotorcyclemapping.org/
> 2017/11/11/exciting-new-job-motorcycle-mapping-refugee-settlements-uganda/
> and Ivan is in Tanzania with Rumani Huria.
>
>
>
> Another that I have been involved in is Janet Chapman (also an attendee at
> the London Missing Maps Mapathons)  with Crowd2Map  in Tanzania where she
> is training the local people to draw the maps themselves and add more
> information and detail with local knowledge. Along with the help of the
> Crowdsource community they have done an amazing job of helping to add to
> the basic infrastructure of Northern Tanzania https://crowd2map.wordpress.
> com/
>
>
>
> These projects have gained a foothold in very poor areas where technology
> is nowhere near as advanced as you are used to, they have started the
> process and they are quite keen to keep the momentum going. The result will
> be a dedicated group in each country that will continue the work, train
> more local people and expand the mapping community. Even Katmandu Living
> Labs was a small group in the beginning.
>
>
>
> And for your information Rebecca Firth is another one who attended the
> London Missing Maps Mapathons. So Mapathons are a valuable way of finding
> people who are prepared to get more involved and actively improve OSM
> locally and elsewhere and not just about bad mappers. It is well worth the
> effort even though many attendees do not return or even continue mapping.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail  for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[ralph.aytoun]

John,
I am not sure what you are trying to say, but to help you understand 
“Microgrants” I can explain some of them to you.

I am helping the WAMM (West African Motorbike Mappers) who are in Sierra Leone. 
The lead for this was Ivan Gayton from Medicins sans Frontieres and Rupert Alan 
(A regular attendee at The London Missing Maps Mapathons). 
https://africamotorcyclemapping.org/category/rupert-allan-consultant/

They have supplied equipment and are training local people to travel around 
Sierra Leone (at present they are working their way through the Eastern 
Province and they have completed Kailahun District and almost completed Kenema 
District) visiting every town, village, hamlet and isolated dwellings taking 
gps readings to supply coordinates for the names of each of these places, with 
data such as the presence of a water pump, local market and health facilities. 
They download this information onto a spreadsheet and I have been checking 
their work and adding these names and data to OSM. This field work is 
continuing with local people even though Rupert has moved on to Uganda 
https://africamotorcyclemapping.org/2017/11/11/exciting-new-job-motorcycle-mapping-refugee-settlements-uganda/
 and Ivan is in Tanzania with Rumani Huria.

Another that I have been involved in is Janet Chapman (also an attendee at the 
London Missing Maps Mapathons)  with Crowd2Map  in Tanzania where she is 
training the local people to draw the maps themselves and add more information 
and detail with local knowledge. Along with the help of the Crowdsource 
community they have done an amazing job of helping to add to the basic 
infrastructure of Northern Tanzania https://crowd2map.wordpress.com/  

These projects have gained a foothold in very poor areas where technology is 
nowhere near as advanced as you are used to, they have started the process and 
they are quite keen to keep the momentum going. The result will be a dedicated 
group in each country that will continue the work, train more local people and 
expand the mapping community. Even Katmandu Living Labs was a small group in 
the beginning.

And for your information Rebecca Firth is another one who attended the London 
Missing Maps Mapathons. So Mapathons are a valuable way of finding people who 
are prepared to get more involved and actively improve OSM locally and 
elsewhere and not just about bad mappers. It is well worth the effort even 
though many attendees do not return or even continue mapping. 


Sent from Mail for Windows 10

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

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[john whelan]

Are we talking about Task Manger projects initiated and run by local
project managers or something else?

If we are talking about Task Manger projects then I suggest asking the
project manager(s) to do a write up on their experiences and see if this
can be brought to the attention of OSMWEEKLY.  We might as well get the
brownie points for them.

When I see the word microgrant that doesn't suggest the sort of thing I'm
talking about.

Cheerio John

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

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[john whelan]

I would agree with you on shape visually but the area of a building is used
by some to estimate population and the question is when we change the shape
we also change the area albeit slightly.  My scientific background suggests
this is an additional element of error.  However given the quality of the
mapping it is probably not significant but I'm not qualified to say.  All I
can do is identify possible problem areas.

The other problem is round buildings, square them and you do get
significant errors creeping in.  So the process of squaring them should
ensure they are omitted from the squaring process.  ie select buildings in
JOSM then hit q may not give the results desired.

Has anyone done a proper analysis?

Better tools may help in the future but there is still the problem of what
is there currently.

At the moment I get the impression this is considered not to be a HOT
responsibility even though much of the poor mapping was done by HOT mappers
working on HOT projects and that is unfortunately the view held by a number
of OSM mappers that HOT is irresponsible.

Cheerio John



On 10 December 2017 at 06:26, Scott Davies <mr.scott.dav...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> >From a validation point of view does it matter if the building is not
> square?  Is it acceptable to square a building even though we know this
> will introduce an element of approximation or error.
>
> John, just on this one point, I'm not sure this is true. The 'element of
> approximation' is inherent in the mapping process, and is there whether the
> building is squared or not. If the building is rectangular in reality, then
> squaring it will make it better represent the actual shape than a freehand
> version would. I'm not convinced it would generally make any real
> difference in terms of its area either.
>
>
>
> On 10 December 2017 at 00:47, john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have considerable coding experience but not in JAVA script which is
>> required for iD as I understand it and since it about two years to get up
>> to speed with a new programming language I'll take  a pass on that.  There
>> is a building_tool available now in JOSM and new mappers are quite capable
>> of using it.  I was involved with a maperthon recently mapping buildings
>> and I just had all the new mappers use JOSM and the building_tool.  Jo has
>> had a similar experience in Belgium.
>>
>> There are times when iD must be used for example when JAVA cannot be
>> installed or its an Apple computer but for Windows machines if you're
>> mapping buildings the building_tool plugin does an excellent job.  If you
>> ask the new mappers nicely to install JAVA on their machines before the
>> maperthon its quite fast to get them up and working.
>>
>> Cheerio John
>>
>> On 9 December 2017 at 19:35, Phil (The Geek) Wyatt <p...@wyatt-family.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi John,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Seems to be a few new issues here but I will have a go at them.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> · I have never been to a mapathon so can't comment on anything
>>> to do with them
>>>
>>> · As I understand it, Missing Maps is a different organisation
>>> that just uses the HOT tasking manager. Their general mandate seems to be
>>> to work with local communities. If they are not, then you probably need to
>>> take that up with them (or their participating organisations). I have only
>>> worked on their projects via the HOT tasking manager
>>>
>>> · Do you have coding experience that can help with the ID
>>> building tool?
>>>
>>> · I still think some alert to save frequently (regardless of
>>> tile lock time) would be a better solution than extending tile lock time.
>>> That might simply mean that more objects have been mapped over a longer
>>> period and the problem compounds.
>>>
>>> · Correcting buildings when validating/shortage of validators?
>>> OK if this is unlikely to be the solution then we are back to better tools
>>> for initial digitising. Can you help with coding?
>>>
>>> · Wasn't aware of any scoring for validated tiles.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers - Phil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com]
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, December 10, 2017 11:07 AM
>>> *To:* Phil (The Geek) Wyatt
>>> *Cc:* hot@openstreetmap.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think the London mapperthons expect 30% of thei

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[Scott Davies]

>From a validation point of view does it matter if the building is not
square?  Is it acceptable to square a building even though we know this
will introduce an element of approximation or error.

John, just on this one point, I'm not sure this is true. The 'element of
approximation' is inherent in the mapping process, and is there whether the
building is squared or not. If the building is rectangular in reality, then
squaring it will make it better represent the actual shape than a freehand
version would. I'm not convinced it would generally make any real
difference in terms of its area either.



On 10 December 2017 at 00:47, john whelan <jwhelan0...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have considerable coding experience but not in JAVA script which is
> required for iD as I understand it and since it about two years to get up
> to speed with a new programming language I'll take  a pass on that.  There
> is a building_tool available now in JOSM and new mappers are quite capable
> of using it.  I was involved with a maperthon recently mapping buildings
> and I just had all the new mappers use JOSM and the building_tool.  Jo has
> had a similar experience in Belgium.
>
> There are times when iD must be used for example when JAVA cannot be
> installed or its an Apple computer but for Windows machines if you're
> mapping buildings the building_tool plugin does an excellent job.  If you
> ask the new mappers nicely to install JAVA on their machines before the
> maperthon its quite fast to get them up and working.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 9 December 2017 at 19:35, Phil (The Geek) Wyatt <p...@wyatt-family.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi John,
>>
>>
>>
>> Seems to be a few new issues here but I will have a go at them.
>>
>>
>>
>> · I have never been to a mapathon so can't comment on anything
>> to do with them
>>
>> · As I understand it, Missing Maps is a different organisation
>> that just uses the HOT tasking manager. Their general mandate seems to be
>> to work with local communities. If they are not, then you probably need to
>> take that up with them (or their participating organisations). I have only
>> worked on their projects via the HOT tasking manager
>>
>> · Do you have coding experience that can help with the ID
>> building tool?
>>
>> · I still think some alert to save frequently (regardless of
>> tile lock time) would be a better solution than extending tile lock time.
>> That might simply mean that more objects have been mapped over a longer
>> period and the problem compounds.
>>
>> · Correcting buildings when validating/shortage of validators?
>> OK if this is unlikely to be the solution then we are back to better tools
>> for initial digitising. Can you help with coding?
>>
>> · Wasn't aware of any scoring for validated tiles.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers - Phil
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Sunday, December 10, 2017 11:07 AM
>> *To:* Phil (The Geek) Wyatt
>> *Cc:* hot@openstreetmap.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM
>>
>>
>>
>> I think the London mapperthons expect 30% of their attendees to return.
>> So unfortunately 50% can be expected to be "disposable" mappers and they
>> don't search out the information as you do.  If we can keep their interest
>> a bit longer they make fewer mistakes.  So one thing might be to see what
>> we can do to help them return more than once.
>>
>>
>>
>> There are two sides to HOT, one is the disaster side and I think that
>> side needs the very organised approach to get things done quickly.  The
>> other side is the "missing maps" side and that is where I think we could do
>> better in involving the locals. Generally speaking mappers feel more
>> commitment and involvement mapping locally.  There are some projects run
>> out of Africa and its interesting to see the project managers concerned
>> develop their skill sets over time. The first projects can be really not
>> well thought out but they learn by experience.  OSM in general likes to see
>> local mappers making decisions about imports etc.  Unless we can develop
>> the mapping skills of the locals they aren't going to feel involved and I
>> think that is important.  It's when you see the cafes and other POIs
>> sneaking on to the map that you can be reasonably certain that there are
>> locals getting involved and that is where HOT can get a few brownie points
>> and at the moment I think it needs every one it can get.  This

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[Phil (The Geek) Wyatt]

Hi John,

 

Seems to be a few new issues here but I will have a go at them.

 

· I have never been to a mapathon so can't comment on anything to do 
with them

· As I understand it, Missing Maps is a different organisation that 
just uses the HOT tasking manager. Their general mandate seems to be to work 
with local communities. If they are not, then you probably need to take that up 
with them (or their participating organisations). I have only worked on their 
projects via the HOT tasking manager

· Do you have coding experience that can help with the ID building tool?

· I still think some alert to save frequently (regardless of tile lock 
time) would be a better solution than extending tile lock time. That might 
simply mean that more objects have been mapped over a longer period and the 
problem compounds.

· Correcting buildings when validating/shortage of validators? OK if 
this is unlikely to be the solution then we are back to better tools for 
initial digitising. Can you help with coding?

· Wasn't aware of any scoring for validated tiles.

 

Cheers - Phil

 

From: john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2017 11:07 AM
To: Phil (The Geek) Wyatt
Cc: hot@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

 

I think the London mapperthons expect 30% of their attendees to return.  So 
unfortunately 50% can be expected to be "disposable" mappers and they don't 
search out the information as you do.  If we can keep their interest a bit 
longer they make fewer mistakes.  So one thing might be to see what we can do 
to help them return more than once.

 

There are two sides to HOT, one is the disaster side and I think that side 
needs the very organised approach to get things done quickly.  The other side 
is the "missing maps" side and that is where I think we could do better in 
involving the locals. Generally speaking mappers feel more commitment and 
involvement mapping locally.  There are some projects run out of Africa and its 
interesting to see the project managers concerned develop their skill sets over 
time. The first projects can be really not well thought out but they learn by 
experience.  OSM in general likes to see local mappers making decisions about 
imports etc.  Unless we can develop the mapping skills of the locals they 
aren't going to feel involved and I think that is important.  It's when you see 
the cafes and other POIs sneaking on to the map that you can be reasonably 
certain that there are locals getting involved and that is where HOT can get a 
few brownie points and at the moment I think it needs every one it can get.  
This is politics with a small p.

 

New mappers first time mapping using iD for buildings you might be lucky to see 
twenty buildings.  Give them a building_tool and you'll get a lot more out of 
them.  When they map the tile is locked for two hours.  At the end of that time 
the tile becomes available again to be mapped.  The first mapper may not have 
uploaded their buildings.  A second mapper now maps the same tile and when they 
both upload that is when I think we get the double mapping which is a waste of 
mapper time and not only that but it screws up calculations about how many 
buildings there are.  With a four hour lock we stand a much better chance that 
two mappers will not map the same tile at the same time.  Even uploading every 
thirty minutes would reduce the number of double mappings.

 

Correcting buildings when validating?  It takes about three times longer to 
correct a badly mapped building than it does to map it from scratch with JOSM 
and the building_tool.  In Nepal 70% of the mappers mapped once.  Their 
building mapping was exceptionally poor.  When faced with large numbers of 
poorly mapped buildings it seems difficult to find validators who are motivated 
enough to go in and fix the problems.  I'm not one of them.  If the mappers are 
only going to map once any feedback will be ignored.  We know that giving 
feedback within 24 hrs motivates mappers and catches early errors so we get 
better quality work but we don't have the validators available to do this.  
Validation works best if its done at the start of a project as the project 
progresses.  Validating three month old work is much more work, bad habits will 
have set in.  Instead of problem avoid its problem correct and that takes more 
validation effort.

 

TM3 hopefully will improve this by giving a score for tiles validated. 

 

Cheerio John

 

On 9 December 2017 at 18:28, Phil (The Geek) Wyatt <p...@wyatt-family.com> 
wrote:

Hi John,

 

I have no formal role in HOT, just a casual OSM mapper so all these comments 
are from that perspective. I have participated in HOT projects via their 
tasking manager. I am also not a coder but am aware of the process involved in 
respect of the ID Editor and Tasking Manager development.

 

I d

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[john whelan]

I think the London mapperthons expect 30% of their attendees to return.  So
unfortunately 50% can be expected to be "disposable" mappers and they don't
search out the information as you do.  If we can keep their interest a bit
longer they make fewer mistakes.  So one thing might be to see what we can
do to help them return more than once.

There are two sides to HOT, one is the disaster side and I think that side
needs the very organised approach to get things done quickly.  The other
side is the "missing maps" side and that is where I think we could do
better in involving the locals. Generally speaking mappers feel more
commitment and involvement mapping locally.  There are some projects run
out of Africa and its interesting to see the project managers concerned
develop their skill sets over time. The first projects can be really not
well thought out but they learn by experience.  OSM in general likes to see
local mappers making decisions about imports etc.  Unless we can develop
the mapping skills of the locals they aren't going to feel involved and I
think that is important.  It's when you see the cafes and other POIs
sneaking on to the map that you can be reasonably certain that there are
locals getting involved and that is where HOT can get a few brownie points
and at the moment I think it needs every one it can get.  This is politics
with a small p.

New mappers first time mapping using iD for buildings you might be lucky to
see twenty buildings.  Give them a building_tool and you'll get a lot more
out of them.  When they map the tile is locked for two hours.  At the end
of that time the tile becomes available again to be mapped.  The first
mapper may not have uploaded their buildings.  A second mapper now maps the
same tile and when they both upload that is when I think we get the double
mapping which is a waste of mapper time and not only that but it screws up
calculations about how many buildings there are.  With a four hour lock we
stand a much better chance that two mappers will not map the same tile at
the same time.  Even uploading every thirty minutes would reduce the number
of double mappings.

Correcting buildings when validating?  It takes about three times longer to
correct a badly mapped building than it does to map it from scratch with
JOSM and the building_tool.  In Nepal 70% of the mappers mapped once.
Their building mapping was exceptionally poor.  When faced with large
numbers of poorly mapped buildings it seems difficult to find validators
who are motivated enough to go in and fix the problems.  I'm not one of
them.  If the mappers are only going to map once any feedback will be
ignored.  We know that giving feedback within 24 hrs motivates mappers and
catches early errors so we get better quality work but we don't have the
validators available to do this.  Validation works best if its done at the
start of a project as the project progresses.  Validating three month old
work is much more work, bad habits will have set in.  Instead of problem
avoid its problem correct and that takes more validation effort.

TM3 hopefully will improve this by giving a score for tiles validated.

Cheerio John

On 9 December 2017 at 18:28, Phil (The Geek) Wyatt 
wrote:

> Hi John,
>
>
>
> I have no formal role in HOT, just a casual OSM mapper so all these
> comments are from that perspective. I have participated in HOT projects via
> their tasking manager. I am also not a coder but am aware of the process
> involved in respect of the ID Editor and Tasking Manager development.
>
>
>
> I don't think building issues are restricted to HOT projects. Indeed when
> I first started mapping in my own neighbourhood I didnt really have a clue
> on how to map buildings but over time I found videos, joined mailing lists,
> found LearnOSM, found tasking managers across the globe and generally
> became a better mapper. At each step I learnt more and hopefully became a
> better mapper. I still don't do any validation as I don't consider myself
> experienced enough in JOSM and lots of the other validation tools. I have
> participated in some map roulette challenges.
>
>
>
> As you have indicated in previous emails, a building tool in ID may stop
> some of the issues you mention and from my investigation this is actually
> underway already (and has been for some time). Any assistance you can
> provide would be appreciated by everyone involved.
>
>
>
> I will try and answer specific points in your email from my personal
> perspective.
>
>
>
> · I think all buildings should be polygons rather than points.
> Better to teach people how to map as polygons rather than expect another
> mapper to replace a point with a polygon at some time in the future (if
> ever).
>
> · Incorrectly mapped building - I would always try and correct
> the error if I had the required skills. If there were many on the tile in a
> tasking manager project that were poorly mapped I suspect I would
> invalidate 

Re: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

[Phil (The Geek) Wyatt]

Hi John,

 

I have no formal role in HOT, just a casual OSM mapper so all these comments 
are from that perspective. I have participated in HOT projects via their 
tasking manager. I am also not a coder but am aware of the process involved in 
respect of the ID Editor and Tasking Manager development.

 

I don't think building issues are restricted to HOT projects. Indeed when I 
first started mapping in my own neighbourhood I didnt really have a clue on how 
to map buildings but over time I found videos, joined mailing lists, found 
LearnOSM, found tasking managers across the globe and generally became a better 
mapper. At each step I learnt more and hopefully became a better mapper. I 
still don't do any validation as I don't consider myself experienced enough in 
JOSM and lots of the other validation tools. I have participated in some map 
roulette challenges.

 

As you have indicated in previous emails, a building tool in ID may stop some 
of the issues you mention and from my investigation this is actually underway 
already (and has been for some time). Any assistance you can provide would be 
appreciated by everyone involved.

 

I will try and answer specific points in your email from my personal 
perspective.

 

· I think all buildings should be polygons rather than points. Better 
to teach people how to map as polygons rather than expect another mapper to 
replace a point with a polygon at some time in the future (if ever).

· Incorrectly mapped building - I would always try and correct the 
error if I had the required skills. If there were many on the tile in a tasking 
manager project that were poorly mapped I suspect I would invalidate the tile 
if I could not fix them. I would also expect some details from the validator, 
maybe with guidance on where good instructions are for splitting the building 
and maintaining any past history on the object.

· Likewise for buildings 50% greater than actual - I would do the same 
as above - guide the mapper on what they have done wrong and lead them to 
better resources.

· Buildings mapped twice. I am on a crappy Australian fibre to the node 
connection that regularly crashes so I save regularly (20 - 30 objects). I dont 
quite understand your comment that a four hour tile lock limit would eliminate 
this problem - seems completely wrong to me. I would certainly be saving more 
frequently than every 4 hours. Maybe a reminder popup, after 100 objects, might 
be a better solution to ensure folks are regularly saving.

· I don't agree with the view of HOT that "We are the professionals and 
we know best". Having lurked on the HOT slack channels I have seen how they 
size up disasters, deal with local OSM groups and other disaster relief 
organisations before embarking on projects. Indeed on a few occasions they have 
not undertaken any projects when the local communities have indicated they have 
the situation in hand. In those cases they simply offer support if required or 
use their communication channels to direct mappers to the other task managers 
(if desired). There are regular references to local OSM groups prior to project 
commencement.

· As for what is acceptable mapping for a building. The best we can 
hope for is improving tools, educating mappers, more validation tools plus 
willing volunteers (or dare I say it, paid workers) to keep an eye on things 
and help the community make OSM an always improving product.

 

Volunteer gathered information is a bit of a dark art at the best of times and 
many folks/governments are still coming to grips with how it all works and how 
beneficial it can be. Is it perfect...not really, can it be improved...always. 
I think the HOT (and other) tasking managers and the ID editor are always 
improving with better task details, more links to resources etc. I think it's 
up to all of us to contribute in any way we can and put forward ideas, time, 
funds or expertise to make things better.

 

I wasn't aware of the OSMF mailing list so I will join that as well and read up 
what has been happening.

 

Cheers - Phil

 

 

From: john whelan [mailto:jwhelan0...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2017 7:00 AM
To: hot@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [HOT] Buildings and HOT's reputation in OSM

 

Recently there has been some discussion of HOT's input into OpenStreetMap in 
the OSMF mailing list.

 

Perhaps one of the problem areas is mapping that is less than ideal.

 

Basically HOT mainly maps highways, landuse=residential and buildings.

 

These shouldn't be difficult to map correctly.

 

Buildings appear to be the most problematic.

 

I think we need to think about why we are mapping them.  Is node good enough?  
There would be less room for mistakes.

 

If we need outlines and there good reasons why an outline is more valuable than 
a node then we need to define what is acceptable.  Or do we even care?  and its 
the do we even care part that is perceived to