Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Paul Johnson]

Depends on the situation, I don't mess with it if I don't know the area
that well, but if I'm vaguely familiar with maintenance norms in the area
and the context of the road, I'll tag the lanes as best I can if it's
likely still being maintained as a multilane road, but if it's been
downgraded to something without lanes and they're letting it go, I'll tag
that accordingly.

On Wed, May 9, 2018, 10:54 Jack Burke  wrote:

> I add lanes=2 (or other, as appropriate) even when they aren't striped.
> If striping is going to be a requirement, how "fresh" does it have to be?
> I see quite a few roads where you can tell that striping once existed
> because of some barely-visible remnants in spots
>
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>
>> Right, we're only counting striped lanes.
>>
>> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 7:43 PM, Jack Burke  wrote:
>>
>>> But they *are* lanes. They just aren't striped.
>>>
>>> -jack
>>> --
>>> Typos courtesy of fancy auto spell technology
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 8, 2018 3:24:08 PM EDT, Paul Johnson  wrote:

 The tag you're looking for is width, not lanes.

 On Tue, May 8, 2018, 13:29 Tod Fitch  wrote:

> Most residential roads in my area are unstriped but are definitely
> built for two lanes of traffic (one in each direction). It seems perfectly
> reasonable to me to tag them with lanes=2 as they are designed to take two
> lanes of traffic.
>
> In fact, as part of some traffic calming measures a number of
> residential roads are having the lane striping removed. They claim that
> people tend to drive slower if there is no marking showing the boundary 
> for
> oncoming traffic. I certainly will not be removing lanes=2 from those 
> roads.
>
>
> > On May 8, 2018, at 11:20 AM, Mike N  wrote:
> >
> > On 5/8/2018 11:55 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> >> Then with residential streets where there are no lanes, often
> lanes=2 would get tagged anyway despite nothing on the ground suggesting
> that was actually the case.
> >
> >  I hadn't considered that unstriped roads shouldn't have lane
> tagging, but at least this doesn't cause bad effects for map data users.
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>

>>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Jack Burke]

I add lanes=2 (or other, as appropriate) even when they aren't striped.  If
striping is going to be a requirement, how "fresh" does it have to be?  I
see quite a few roads where you can tell that striping once existed because
of some barely-visible remnants in spots

On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:

> Right, we're only counting striped lanes.
>
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 7:43 PM, Jack Burke  wrote:
>
>> But they *are* lanes. They just aren't striped.
>>
>> -jack
>> --
>> Typos courtesy of fancy auto spell technology
>>
>>
>> On May 8, 2018 3:24:08 PM EDT, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>>>
>>> The tag you're looking for is width, not lanes.
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 8, 2018, 13:29 Tod Fitch  wrote:
>>>
 Most residential roads in my area are unstriped but are definitely
 built for two lanes of traffic (one in each direction). It seems perfectly
 reasonable to me to tag them with lanes=2 as they are designed to take two
 lanes of traffic.

 In fact, as part of some traffic calming measures a number of
 residential roads are having the lane striping removed. They claim that
 people tend to drive slower if there is no marking showing the boundary for
 oncoming traffic. I certainly will not be removing lanes=2 from those 
 roads.


 > On May 8, 2018, at 11:20 AM, Mike N  wrote:
 >
 > On 5/8/2018 11:55 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
 >> Then with residential streets where there are no lanes, often
 lanes=2 would get tagged anyway despite nothing on the ground suggesting
 that was actually the case.
 >
 >  I hadn't considered that unstriped roads shouldn't have lane
 tagging, but at least this doesn't cause bad effects for map data users.
 >
 > ___
 > Talk-us mailing list
 > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


 ___
 Talk-us mailing list
 Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

>>>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Paul Johnson]

Right, we're only counting striped lanes.

On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 7:43 PM, Jack Burke  wrote:

> But they *are* lanes. They just aren't striped.
>
> -jack
> --
> Typos courtesy of fancy auto spell technology
>
>
> On May 8, 2018 3:24:08 PM EDT, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>>
>> The tag you're looking for is width, not lanes.
>>
>> On Tue, May 8, 2018, 13:29 Tod Fitch  wrote:
>>
>>> Most residential roads in my area are unstriped but are definitely built
>>> for two lanes of traffic (one in each direction). It seems perfectly
>>> reasonable to me to tag them with lanes=2 as they are designed to take two
>>> lanes of traffic.
>>>
>>> In fact, as part of some traffic calming measures a number of
>>> residential roads are having the lane striping removed. They claim that
>>> people tend to drive slower if there is no marking showing the boundary for
>>> oncoming traffic. I certainly will not be removing lanes=2 from those roads.
>>>
>>>
>>> > On May 8, 2018, at 11:20 AM, Mike N  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On 5/8/2018 11:55 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>>> >> Then with residential streets where there are no lanes, often lanes=2
>>> would get tagged anyway despite nothing on the ground suggesting that was
>>> actually the case.
>>> >
>>> >  I hadn't considered that unstriped roads shouldn't have lane tagging,
>>> but at least this doesn't cause bad effects for map data users.
>>> >
>>> > ___
>>> > Talk-us mailing list
>>> > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Talk-us mailing list
>>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>>
>>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Jack Burke]

But they *are* lanes. They just aren't striped.

-jack
-- 
Typos courtesy of fancy auto spell technology

On May 8, 2018 3:24:08 PM EDT, Paul Johnson  wrote:
>The tag you're looking for is width, not lanes.
>
>On Tue, May 8, 2018, 13:29 Tod Fitch  wrote:
>
>> Most residential roads in my area are unstriped but are definitely
>built
>> for two lanes of traffic (one in each direction). It seems perfectly
>> reasonable to me to tag them with lanes=2 as they are designed to
>take two
>> lanes of traffic.
>>
>> In fact, as part of some traffic calming measures a number of
>residential
>> roads are having the lane striping removed. They claim that people
>tend to
>> drive slower if there is no marking showing the boundary for oncoming
>> traffic. I certainly will not be removing lanes=2 from those roads.
>>
>>
>> > On May 8, 2018, at 11:20 AM, Mike N  wrote:
>> >
>> > On 5/8/2018 11:55 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> >> Then with residential streets where there are no lanes, often
>lanes=2
>> would get tagged anyway despite nothing on the ground suggesting that
>was
>> actually the case.
>> >
>> >  I hadn't considered that unstriped roads shouldn't have lane
>tagging,
>> but at least this doesn't cause bad effects for map data users.
>> >
>> > ___
>> > Talk-us mailing list
>> > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Paul Johnson]

The tag you're looking for is width, not lanes.

On Tue, May 8, 2018, 13:29 Tod Fitch  wrote:

> Most residential roads in my area are unstriped but are definitely built
> for two lanes of traffic (one in each direction). It seems perfectly
> reasonable to me to tag them with lanes=2 as they are designed to take two
> lanes of traffic.
>
> In fact, as part of some traffic calming measures a number of residential
> roads are having the lane striping removed. They claim that people tend to
> drive slower if there is no marking showing the boundary for oncoming
> traffic. I certainly will not be removing lanes=2 from those roads.
>
>
> > On May 8, 2018, at 11:20 AM, Mike N  wrote:
> >
> > On 5/8/2018 11:55 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> >> Then with residential streets where there are no lanes, often lanes=2
> would get tagged anyway despite nothing on the ground suggesting that was
> actually the case.
> >
> >  I hadn't considered that unstriped roads shouldn't have lane tagging,
> but at least this doesn't cause bad effects for map data users.
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Mark Wagner]

What I've observed is that MapRoulette works well with tasks that
are highly localized and don't require much thinking.  "A road crosses a
railroad here: should it be a crossing, or a bridge?" is a good
MapRoulette task, because unusual situations are rare, and the user
doesn't need to consider anything outside the focus point. "This road
segment hasn't been touched in ten years. See if there's anything wrong
with it, and if so, fix it." is bad: the road segment might be a
twenty-mile-long composite of a logging road, a rural highway, and a
driveway, badly aligned, with half the logging end of the road having
been abandoned in the 1970s. The average MapRoulette user is only going
to spot one or two of the problems, and in fixing them, could well
introduce more problems.

-- 
Mark

On Mon, 07 May 2018 22:25:30 -0600
Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> I'd like to learn more about that massive mess and how we can prevent
> that in the future, Paul.To my mind, most TIGER clean up consists of
> atomic tasks, which is where MapRoulette would typically come in
> really handy. (Remember the 70,000 connectivity errors we fixed in
> 2013/4, and the 100,000+ missing railroad crossings which were also
> attributable to TIGER .) But perhaps you have something different in
> mind. I'd like to think MapRoulette can help, also because not
> everybody prefers the same style of working on large projects.--
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, May 7, 2018, at 21:12, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > MapRoulette really made a massive mess of the lanes situation that a
> > more systematic and big-picture effort is starting to get a handle
> > on in Oklahoma.  I think MapRoulette works well for smaller-picture
> > stuff, and is more complimentary to StreetComplete and not terribly
> > great at directing more complicated projects.> 
> > I've restarted my efforts at a county level to avoid having a huge
> > number of tasks that fall largely in Texas, since it seems that the
> > tasking manager is ultimately only capable of dealing with
> > rectangular project areas even if you feed it a more complicated
> > polygon via JSON.> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:32 PM, Martijn van Exel
> >  wrote:>> I’d like to see how TM and MapRoulette could
> > be complementary in this  
> >> effort. I know Clifford has set up a TIGER related challenge on
> >> MapRoulette, and I have done this in the past as well.>> 
> >>  I feel that TM can be good for a general ask like ‘check all TIGER
> >>  residential roads in rural areas in this cell, demote to track /
> >>  unclassified or delete as needed’ whereas MapRoulette may be
> >> useful for more specific TIGER cleanup related tasks?>> 
> >>  Thoughts?
> >> 
> >>  Martijn
> >>   
> >> > On May 5, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Paul Johnson   
> >> > wrote:>>  >   
> >>  > I think it's somewhere between 2000 and 2100.  I'm working on
> >>  > eventually handling the entire state of Oklahoma on a TIGER
> >>  > cleanup and enrichment.  Ideally, I'd like to do the whole state
> >>  > at once (just for variety's sake and for even coverage), but
> >>  > county by county works, too.  If there's a limit for the number
> >>  > of times an area can be split, this could really use some work,
> >>  > too, since 3 (based on tasks2 limit) is not enough.  A 4000 or
> >>  > 5000 task limit should be sufficient for a single county (though
> >>  > definitely won't start off with that many tasks, and almost
> >>  > certainly won't hit that many tasks over the life of a project)
> >>  > if the split limit is increased (like, at least 5, possibly
> >>  > higher just to be on the safe side).>>  > 
> >>  > The idea is to basically keep it in that 75-100 item range per
> >>  > task just to keep it manageable (item count based on the
> >>  > resulting selection when using JOSM search to replace selection
> >>  > and searching for highway=* type:way).>>  > 
> >>  > On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Ian Dees   
> >>  > wrote:>>  > I don't know. Do you see a limit somewhere? I'm
> >>  > happy to increase it.>>  > 
> >>  > On Sat, May 5, 2018, 12:35 Paul Johnson   
> >>  > wrote:>>  > What is the maximum number of tasks possible on the
> >>  > US tasker, and is it possible to change that?>>  >
> >>  > ___ Talk-us mailing
> >>  > list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> >>  > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> >>  > 
> >>  > ___
> >>  > Talk-us mailing list
> >>  > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> >>  > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us  
> >>   
> 


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Paul Johnson]

It's basically the opposite problem of overlooking bike, bus and HOV lanes.
Instead of your lane guidance being off by however lanes were omitted,
you're getting lane advice where it's not applicable.

On Tue, May 8, 2018, 13:21 Mike N  wrote:

> On 5/8/2018 11:55 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Then with residential streets where there are no lanes, often lanes=2
> > would get tagged anyway despite nothing on the ground suggesting that
> > was actually the case.
>
>I hadn't considered that unstriped roads shouldn't have lane tagging,
> but at least this doesn't cause bad effects for map data users.
>
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Tod Fitch]

Most residential roads in my area are unstriped but are definitely built for 
two lanes of traffic (one in each direction). It seems perfectly reasonable to 
me to tag them with lanes=2 as they are designed to take two lanes of traffic.

In fact, as part of some traffic calming measures a number of residential roads 
are having the lane striping removed. They claim that people tend to drive 
slower if there is no marking showing the boundary for oncoming traffic. I 
certainly will not be removing lanes=2 from those roads.


> On May 8, 2018, at 11:20 AM, Mike N  wrote:
> 
> On 5/8/2018 11:55 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> Then with residential streets where there are no lanes, often lanes=2 would 
>> get tagged anyway despite nothing on the ground suggesting that was actually 
>> the case.
> 
>  I hadn't considered that unstriped roads shouldn't have lane tagging, but at 
> least this doesn't cause bad effects for map data users.
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Mike N]

On 5/8/2018 11:55 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Then with residential streets where there are no lanes, often lanes=2 
would get tagged anyway despite nothing on the ground suggesting that 
was actually the case.


  I hadn't considered that unstriped roads shouldn't have lane tagging, 
but at least this doesn't cause bad effects for map data users.


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Clifford Snow]

Martijn,
When I looked at the problem of un-reviewed roads in Washington State, I
considered two approaches. First, use a Tasking Manager to break the state
into smaller chunks. Looking at the map of the US, Washington State doesn't
seem all that large. But when you get into breaking the state into 1 mile
squares, you'd need over 70,000 tiles to check. The second approach, one
one I ended up using is to use Maproulette to check just TIGER roads
imported that haven't been touched since. There was still 30,000 ways in
the second group. Note - I didn't look at tiger:reviewed=no since most
people, including me, often forget to either change it to yes or just
delete the tag. I think we should just delete the tag like JOSM currently
does.

The clean up effort is still ongoing.

I have personally cleaned up a handful of counties which seems quicker but
that approach doesn't have any backup measures. Backup measures like,
keeping roads in the database until someone checks that they have fixed it
or it wasn't a problem. I like the systematic approach that Maproulette
offers.

MR3 has a feature that I really like. One of regularly editors in Eastern
Washington wanted to look at just roads around him. MR3 as I understand,
can do that.

Now if some company with large amounts of gpx traces were to give us a
point cloud of gpx points, we could quickly start cleaning up these rural
roads. Hint - Hint - Telenav.

As a interesting bit of information, only one way is left untouched in King
County from the original import - and it looks good.

Martijn - I'm not sure I really answered your query. Let me know if you
need more.


Best,
Clifford


-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Paul Johnson]

I get that, for the most part, MapRoulette does have a overwhelmingly
positive benefit, the lanes challenge seemed quite underbaked.  The end
result was the majority of ways in Oklahoma that had lane tagging added by
way of MR users were not split where the number of lanes changes, two way
roads were counted like they were one-way roads, and restricted lanes (turn
lanes, bike lanes, bus lanes, etc) either weren't counted or didn't get
lane access tagging.  Then with residential streets where there are no
lanes, often lanes=2 would get tagged anyway despite nothing on the ground
suggesting that was actually the case.  It was a very underwhelming result.

On Mon, May 7, 2018, 23:25 Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> I'd like to learn more about that massive mess and how we can prevent that
> in the future, Paul.
> To my mind, most TIGER clean up consists of atomic tasks, which is where
> MapRoulette would typically come in really handy. (Remember the 70,000
> connectivity errors we fixed in 2013/4, and the 100,000+ missing railroad
> crossings which were also attributable to TIGER .) But perhaps you have
> something different in mind. I'd like to think MapRoulette can help, also
> because not everybody prefers the same style of working on large projects.
> --
>   Martijn van Exel
>   m...@rtijn.org
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018, at 21:12, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> MapRoulette really made a massive mess of the lanes situation that a more
> systematic and big-picture effort is starting to get a handle on in
> Oklahoma.  I think MapRoulette works well for smaller-picture stuff, and is
> more complimentary to StreetComplete and not terribly great at directing
> more complicated projects.
>
> I've restarted my efforts at a county level to avoid having a huge number
> of tasks that fall largely in Texas, since it seems that the tasking
> manager is ultimately only capable of dealing with rectangular project
> areas even if you feed it a more complicated polygon via JSON.
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:32 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:
>
> I’d like to see how TM and MapRoulette could be complementary in this
> effort. I know Clifford has set up a TIGER related challenge on
> MapRoulette, and I have done this in the past as well.
>
> I feel that TM can be good for a general ask like ‘check all TIGER
> residential roads in rural areas in this cell, demote to track /
> unclassified or delete as needed’ whereas MapRoulette may be useful for
> more specific TIGER cleanup related tasks?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Martijn
>
> > On May 5, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> >
> > I think it's somewhere between 2000 and 2100.  I'm working on eventually
> handling the entire state of Oklahoma on a TIGER cleanup and enrichment.
> Ideally, I'd like to do the whole state at once (just for variety's sake
> and for even coverage), but county by county works, too.  If there's a
> limit for the number of times an area can be split, this could really use
> some work, too, since 3 (based on tasks2 limit) is not enough.  A 4000 or
> 5000 task limit should be sufficient for a single county (though definitely
> won't start off with that many tasks, and almost certainly won't hit that
> many tasks over the life of a project) if the split limit is increased
> (like, at least 5, possibly higher just to be on the safe side).
> >
> > The idea is to basically keep it in that 75-100 item range per task just
> to keep it manageable (item count based on the resulting selection when
> using JOSM search to replace selection and searching for highway=*
> type:way).
> >
> > On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:
> > I don't know. Do you see a limit somewhere? I'm happy to increase it.
> >
> > On Sat, May 5, 2018, 12:35 Paul Johnson  wrote:
> > What is the maximum number of tasks possible on the US tasker, and is it
> possible to change that?
> > ___
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Martijn van Exel]

I'd like to learn more about that massive mess and how we can prevent
that in the future, Paul.To my mind, most TIGER clean up consists of atomic 
tasks, which is where
MapRoulette would typically come in really handy. (Remember the 70,000
connectivity errors we fixed in 2013/4, and the 100,000+ missing
railroad crossings which were also attributable to TIGER .) But perhaps
you have something different in mind. I'd like to think MapRoulette can
help, also because not everybody prefers the same style of working on
large projects.--
  Martijn van Exel
  m...@rtijn.org



On Mon, May 7, 2018, at 21:12, Paul Johnson wrote:
> MapRoulette really made a massive mess of the lanes situation that a
> more systematic and big-picture effort is starting to get a handle on
> in Oklahoma.  I think MapRoulette works well for smaller-picture
> stuff, and is more complimentary to StreetComplete and not terribly
> great at directing more complicated projects.> 
> I've restarted my efforts at a county level to avoid having a huge
> number of tasks that fall largely in Texas, since it seems that the
> tasking manager is ultimately only capable of dealing with rectangular
> project areas even if you feed it a more complicated polygon via JSON.> 
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:32 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:>> 
> I’d like to see how TM and MapRoulette could be complementary in this
>> effort. I know Clifford has set up a TIGER related challenge on
>> MapRoulette, and I have done this in the past as well.>> 
>>  I feel that TM can be good for a general ask like ‘check all TIGER
>>  residential roads in rural areas in this cell, demote to track /
>>  unclassified or delete as needed’ whereas MapRoulette may be useful
>>  for more specific TIGER cleanup related tasks?>> 
>>  Thoughts?
>> 
>>  Martijn
>> 
>> > On May 5, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Paul Johnson 
>> > wrote:>>  > 
>>  > I think it's somewhere between 2000 and 2100.  I'm working on
>>  > eventually handling the entire state of Oklahoma on a TIGER
>>  > cleanup and enrichment.  Ideally, I'd like to do the whole state
>>  > at once (just for variety's sake and for even coverage), but
>>  > county by county works, too.  If there's a limit for the number of
>>  > times an area can be split, this could really use some work, too,
>>  > since 3 (based on tasks2 limit) is not enough.  A 4000 or 5000
>>  > task limit should be sufficient for a single county (though
>>  > definitely won't start off with that many tasks, and almost
>>  > certainly won't hit that many tasks over the life of a project) if
>>  > the split limit is increased (like, at least 5, possibly higher
>>  > just to be on the safe side).>>  > 
>>  > The idea is to basically keep it in that 75-100 item range per
>>  > task just to keep it manageable (item count based on the resulting
>>  > selection when using JOSM search to replace selection and
>>  > searching for highway=* type:way).>>  > 
>>  > On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Ian Dees 
>>  > wrote:>>  > I don't know. Do you see a limit somewhere? I'm happy to
>>  > increase it.>>  > 
>>  > On Sat, May 5, 2018, 12:35 Paul Johnson 
>>  > wrote:>>  > What is the maximum number of tasks possible on the US 
>> tasker, and
>>  > is it possible to change that?>>  > 
>> ___
>>  > Talk-us mailing list
>>  > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>>  > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>  > 
>>  > ___
>>  > Talk-us mailing list
>>  > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>>  > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>> 

___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Paul Johnson]

MapRoulette really made a massive mess of the lanes situation that a more
systematic and big-picture effort is starting to get a handle on in
Oklahoma.  I think MapRoulette works well for smaller-picture stuff, and is
more complimentary to StreetComplete and not terribly great at directing
more complicated projects.

I've restarted my efforts at a county level to avoid having a huge number
of tasks that fall largely in Texas, since it seems that the tasking
manager is ultimately only capable of dealing with rectangular project
areas even if you feed it a more complicated polygon via JSON.

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:32 PM, Martijn van Exel  wrote:

> I’d like to see how TM and MapRoulette could be complementary in this
> effort. I know Clifford has set up a TIGER related challenge on
> MapRoulette, and I have done this in the past as well.
>
> I feel that TM can be good for a general ask like ‘check all TIGER
> residential roads in rural areas in this cell, demote to track /
> unclassified or delete as needed’ whereas MapRoulette may be useful for
> more specific TIGER cleanup related tasks?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Martijn
>
> > On May 5, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> >
> > I think it's somewhere between 2000 and 2100.  I'm working on eventually
> handling the entire state of Oklahoma on a TIGER cleanup and enrichment.
> Ideally, I'd like to do the whole state at once (just for variety's sake
> and for even coverage), but county by county works, too.  If there's a
> limit for the number of times an area can be split, this could really use
> some work, too, since 3 (based on tasks2 limit) is not enough.  A 4000 or
> 5000 task limit should be sufficient for a single county (though definitely
> won't start off with that many tasks, and almost certainly won't hit that
> many tasks over the life of a project) if the split limit is increased
> (like, at least 5, possibly higher just to be on the safe side).
> >
> > The idea is to basically keep it in that 75-100 item range per task just
> to keep it manageable (item count based on the resulting selection when
> using JOSM search to replace selection and searching for highway=*
> type:way).
> >
> > On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:
> > I don't know. Do you see a limit somewhere? I'm happy to increase it.
> >
> > On Sat, May 5, 2018, 12:35 Paul Johnson  wrote:
> > What is the maximum number of tasks possible on the US tasker, and is it
> possible to change that?
> > ___
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> >
> > ___
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Martijn van Exel]

I’d like to see how TM and MapRoulette could be complementary in this effort. I 
know Clifford has set up a TIGER related challenge on MapRoulette, and I have 
done this in the past as well. 

I feel that TM can be good for a general ask like ‘check all TIGER residential 
roads in rural areas in this cell, demote to track / unclassified or delete as 
needed’ whereas MapRoulette may be useful for more specific TIGER cleanup 
related tasks? 

Thoughts?

Martijn

> On May 5, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Paul Johnson  wrote:
> 
> I think it's somewhere between 2000 and 2100.  I'm working on eventually 
> handling the entire state of Oklahoma on a TIGER cleanup and enrichment.  
> Ideally, I'd like to do the whole state at once (just for variety's sake and 
> for even coverage), but county by county works, too.  If there's a limit for 
> the number of times an area can be split, this could really use some work, 
> too, since 3 (based on tasks2 limit) is not enough.  A 4000 or 5000 task 
> limit should be sufficient for a single county (though definitely won't start 
> off with that many tasks, and almost certainly won't hit that many tasks over 
> the life of a project) if the split limit is increased (like, at least 5, 
> possibly higher just to be on the safe side).
> 
> The idea is to basically keep it in that 75-100 item range per task just to 
> keep it manageable (item count based on the resulting selection when using 
> JOSM search to replace selection and searching for highway=* type:way).
> 
> On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:
> I don't know. Do you see a limit somewhere? I'm happy to increase it. 
> 
> On Sat, May 5, 2018, 12:35 Paul Johnson  wrote:
> What is the maximum number of tasks possible on the US tasker, and is it 
> possible to change that?
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
> 
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Paul Johnson]

I think it's somewhere between 2000 and 2100.  I'm working on eventually
handling the entire state of Oklahoma on a TIGER cleanup and enrichment.
*Ideally*, I'd like to do the whole state at once (just for variety's sake
and for even coverage), but county by county works, too.  If there's a
limit for the number of times an area can be split, this could really use
some work, too, since 3 (based on tasks2 limit) is not enough.  A 4000 or
5000 task limit should be sufficient for a single county (though definitely
won't start off with that many tasks, and almost certainly won't hit that
many tasks over the life of a project) if the split limit is increased
(like, at least 5, possibly higher just to be on the safe side).

The idea is to basically keep it in that 75-100 item range per task just to
keep it manageable (item count based on the resulting selection when using
JOSM search to replace selection and searching for highway=* type:way).

On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Ian Dees  wrote:

> I don't know. Do you see a limit somewhere? I'm happy to increase it.
>
> On Sat, May 5, 2018, 12:35 Paul Johnson  wrote:
>
>> What is the maximum number of tasks possible on the US tasker, and is it
>> possible to change that?
>> ___
>> Talk-us mailing list
>> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>>
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Maximum number of tasks on US tasker

[Ian Dees]

I don't know. Do you see a limit somewhere? I'm happy to increase it.

On Sat, May 5, 2018, 12:35 Paul Johnson  wrote:

> What is the maximum number of tasks possible on the US tasker, and is it
> possible to change that?
> ___
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us