[HOT] Community Working Group 1400UTC

[Russell Deffner]

Greetings everyone,

 

The Community Working Group has made some great progress testing various
platforms for hosting online presentations (aka Community Hour) but in my
opinion we haven't found the 'right one' yet. If you have any experience or
desire to help us explore platforms we are meeting tomorrow 10/14 at
1400UTC. Our meetings are on Mumble, if it's your first time it takes a bit
of setup, start here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mumble 

 

Thank you for contributing to HOT in so many ways!

=Russ

 

Russell Deffner

Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT) - Voting Member:
russell.deff...@hotosm.org

Web   | Wiki
  | Blog
  | Contact
  |
Donate  

OSM/Skype: russdeffner

 

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

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Tyler Radford]

Phil, Robert, John, Mike, others have come up with some really great ideas
pertaining to Tasking Manager improvements.

Please log them or add to already existing requests here so we don't lose
them! https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues

One of the big visions for the future Tasking Manager is to better guides
mappers having the right skills to the right job.

Thanks for all the thoughtful and creative ideas.

*Tyler Radford*
Executive Director
tyler.radf...@hotosm.org
@TylerSRadford

*Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team*
*Using OpenStreetMap for Humanitarian Response & Economic Development*
web  | twitter  | facebook
 | donate 


On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Autre Planete 
wrote:

> Thanks , Listened to you,Mike Thompson!
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 9:13 PM, Mike Thompson 
> wrote:
>
>> Two situations that a new mapper may face:
>> 1) Task area with nothing, or very little, mapped.
>> This *should* be pretty easy. For example, in the case of buildings: draw
>> building, square it, tag it as a building, don't draw two buildings over
>> lapping each other.  However, despite verbal instruction, demonstrations,
>> and written instructions, many get it wrong. My conclusion is human
>> learning is more complex than many of us assume (hence the need for
>> professional educators in our society). We may need to adjust our training
>> (both online and in person) to be more effective. Just providing the
>> information is not enough.
>>
>> 2) Task area has already been partially mapped, either outside of the
>> tasking manager, as part of a previous project, or as part of the current
>> project where another mapper didn't finish.
>> Essentially we are asking the mapper in question to be a validator,
>> because we expect that when he or she marks the task as done, they are
>> saying that all of the mapping is done according to the instructions, not
>> just the mapping he or she did. This can be very difficult for a new
>> mapper, especially without the tools in JOSM. For example, if the
>> instructions call for buildings to be square, they have to pan the entire
>> task looking for buildings where is in JOSM, I put all buildings into the
>> to do list and step through them (I could also search for ways tagged as
>> buildings with less than a certain number of nodes and square them all at
>> once).
>>
>> Ideas:
>> * Have the tasking manager require a mapper to open (no way of knowing if
>> they actually read them)  their messages before they can do checkout
>> another tasks.
>> * Have tasking manager forward messages to mapper's email account.
>> * Require that a mapper at least visits the "instructions" tab before
>> checking out a task.
>> * Enhance project instructions to cover "edge cases". For example, should
>> buildings under construction be mapped? Should existing features be
>> spatially adjusted to the preferred imagery source, or should the imagery
>> be adjusted to them?
>> * Enhance project instructions to have links to examples (some of the
>> Africa projects already do this).  "Not sure what a building under
>> construction looks like? Click here for some examples." "Not sure how to
>> adjust imagery offset in iD? Click here for instructions."
>> * Mapathons should not be held without experienced mappers present who
>> are willing to spend the entire event going from person to person to check
>> on their work and answer any questions. We need many different people to
>> make this work, and if someone just wants to be an organizer that is great,
>> but they should ensure experienced mappers are in attendance.
>> * Some sort of online way to quickly give feedback as soon as a save is
>> made such that it is not necessary to wait until a task is marked as done.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>
>
> ___
> 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] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Autre Planete]

Thanks , Listened to you,Mike Thompson!

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 9:13 PM, Mike Thompson  wrote:

> Two situations that a new mapper may face:
> 1) Task area with nothing, or very little, mapped.
> This *should* be pretty easy. For example, in the case of buildings: draw
> building, square it, tag it as a building, don't draw two buildings over
> lapping each other.  However, despite verbal instruction, demonstrations,
> and written instructions, many get it wrong. My conclusion is human
> learning is more complex than many of us assume (hence the need for
> professional educators in our society). We may need to adjust our training
> (both online and in person) to be more effective. Just providing the
> information is not enough.
>
> 2) Task area has already been partially mapped, either outside of the
> tasking manager, as part of a previous project, or as part of the current
> project where another mapper didn't finish.
> Essentially we are asking the mapper in question to be a validator,
> because we expect that when he or she marks the task as done, they are
> saying that all of the mapping is done according to the instructions, not
> just the mapping he or she did. This can be very difficult for a new
> mapper, especially without the tools in JOSM. For example, if the
> instructions call for buildings to be square, they have to pan the entire
> task looking for buildings where is in JOSM, I put all buildings into the
> to do list and step through them (I could also search for ways tagged as
> buildings with less than a certain number of nodes and square them all at
> once).
>
> Ideas:
> * Have the tasking manager require a mapper to open (no way of knowing if
> they actually read them)  their messages before they can do checkout
> another tasks.
> * Have tasking manager forward messages to mapper's email account.
> * Require that a mapper at least visits the "instructions" tab before
> checking out a task.
> * Enhance project instructions to cover "edge cases". For example, should
> buildings under construction be mapped? Should existing features be
> spatially adjusted to the preferred imagery source, or should the imagery
> be adjusted to them?
> * Enhance project instructions to have links to examples (some of the
> Africa projects already do this).  "Not sure what a building under
> construction looks like? Click here for some examples." "Not sure how to
> adjust imagery offset in iD? Click here for instructions."
> * Mapathons should not be held without experienced mappers present who are
> willing to spend the entire event going from person to person to check on
> their work and answer any questions. We need many different people to make
> this work, and if someone just wants to be an organizer that is great, but
> they should ensure experienced mappers are in attendance.
> * Some sort of online way to quickly give feedback as soon as a save is
> made such that it is not necessary to wait until a task is marked as done.
>
> Mike
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[john whelan]

Just a couple of comments about data quality, a week ago in Ethiopia there
were 4,500 untagged ways or untagged with a comment, the most common is
area=yes.  These do not show up in the map so a user in the field wouldn't
even know of their existence.

To me this a data quality issue.  Things have been mapped but are not
appearing in the map.

Secondly talking to an American data analyst his issue was sometimes the
maps could be trusted and sometimes they weren't so good.  In Nepal the
amount of effort needed to clean up the map was considerable.  I seem to
recall Kathmandu Living Labs has been involved in a fair amount of work and
I think it was because they saw the value in cleaner data.

I don't think Ethiopia is exceptional.

Cheerio John

On 13 October 2016 at 11:43, Mike Thompson  wrote:

> Two situations that a new mapper may face:
> 1) Task area with nothing, or very little, mapped.
> This *should* be pretty easy. For example, in the case of buildings: draw
> building, square it, tag it as a building, don't draw two buildings over
> lapping each other.  However, despite verbal instruction, demonstrations,
> and written instructions, many get it wrong. My conclusion is human
> learning is more complex than many of us assume (hence the need for
> professional educators in our society). We may need to adjust our training
> (both online and in person) to be more effective. Just providing the
> information is not enough.
>
> 2) Task area has already been partially mapped, either outside of the
> tasking manager, as part of a previous project, or as part of the current
> project where another mapper didn't finish.
> Essentially we are asking the mapper in question to be a validator,
> because we expect that when he or she marks the task as done, they are
> saying that all of the mapping is done according to the instructions, not
> just the mapping he or she did. This can be very difficult for a new
> mapper, especially without the tools in JOSM. For example, if the
> instructions call for buildings to be square, they have to pan the entire
> task looking for buildings where is in JOSM, I put all buildings into the
> to do list and step through them (I could also search for ways tagged as
> buildings with less than a certain number of nodes and square them all at
> once).
>
> Ideas:
> * Have the tasking manager require a mapper to open (no way of knowing if
> they actually read them)  their messages before they can do checkout
> another tasks.
> * Have tasking manager forward messages to mapper's email account.
> * Require that a mapper at least visits the "instructions" tab before
> checking out a task.
> * Enhance project instructions to cover "edge cases". For example, should
> buildings under construction be mapped? Should existing features be
> spatially adjusted to the preferred imagery source, or should the imagery
> be adjusted to them?
> * Enhance project instructions to have links to examples (some of the
> Africa projects already do this).  "Not sure what a building under
> construction looks like? Click here for some examples." "Not sure how to
> adjust imagery offset in iD? Click here for instructions."
> * Mapathons should not be held without experienced mappers present who are
> willing to spend the entire event going from person to person to check on
> their work and answer any questions. We need many different people to make
> this work, and if someone just wants to be an organizer that is great, but
> they should ensure experienced mappers are in attendance.
> * Some sort of online way to quickly give feedback as soon as a save is
> made such that it is not necessary to wait until a task is marked as done.
>
> Mike
>
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Mike Thompson]

Two situations that a new mapper may face:
1) Task area with nothing, or very little, mapped.
This *should* be pretty easy. For example, in the case of buildings: draw
building, square it, tag it as a building, don't draw two buildings over
lapping each other.  However, despite verbal instruction, demonstrations,
and written instructions, many get it wrong. My conclusion is human
learning is more complex than many of us assume (hence the need for
professional educators in our society). We may need to adjust our training
(both online and in person) to be more effective. Just providing the
information is not enough.

2) Task area has already been partially mapped, either outside of the
tasking manager, as part of a previous project, or as part of the current
project where another mapper didn't finish.
Essentially we are asking the mapper in question to be a validator, because
we expect that when he or she marks the task as done, they are saying that
all of the mapping is done according to the instructions, not just the
mapping he or she did. This can be very difficult for a new mapper,
especially without the tools in JOSM. For example, if the instructions call
for buildings to be square, they have to pan the entire task looking for
buildings where is in JOSM, I put all buildings into the to do list and
step through them (I could also search for ways tagged as buildings with
less than a certain number of nodes and square them all at once).

Ideas:
* Have the tasking manager require a mapper to open (no way of knowing if
they actually read them)  their messages before they can do checkout
another tasks.
* Have tasking manager forward messages to mapper's email account.
* Require that a mapper at least visits the "instructions" tab before
checking out a task.
* Enhance project instructions to cover "edge cases". For example, should
buildings under construction be mapped? Should existing features be
spatially adjusted to the preferred imagery source, or should the imagery
be adjusted to them?
* Enhance project instructions to have links to examples (some of the
Africa projects already do this).  "Not sure what a building under
construction looks like? Click here for some examples." "Not sure how to
adjust imagery offset in iD? Click here for instructions."
* Mapathons should not be held without experienced mappers present who are
willing to spend the entire event going from person to person to check on
their work and answer any questions. We need many different people to make
this work, and if someone just wants to be an organizer that is great, but
they should ensure experienced mappers are in attendance.
* Some sort of online way to quickly give feedback as soon as a save is
made such that it is not necessary to wait until a task is marked as done.

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

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Autre Planete]

Greets!

Sorry to barge in. ...but what Mr.Phil says  is really true  in the case
of  new mappers.

Cheers:)
Autre

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 7:08 PM, john whelan  wrote:

> ​I think we have to accept we need new mappers and we need them to be
> motivated so mapping projects that do not seem important ​may not be so
> motivating.  The Statistics Canada project is interesting as in the longer
> term I think we should see a pool of experienced mappers coming out of that
> but it is a longer term project and its interesting to see a different
> approach with more emphasis on data quality.  We rarely discuss the needs
> of our clients ie those who use the maps in the discussion group.
>
> Mapping one on one with new mappers you can train them fairly quickly but
> it still takes twenty minutes or so.  With a group I think you have to
> accept you have them there for two/three hours, 50% will never map again,
> and they want to start mapping now.  What's the guy at the front talking
> about OpenStreetMap and boring stuff for?  Asking them to train for two
> hours first and get a badge is a sort of non-starter.  Ask me to go through
> training for validation and I'm more likely to go off and play in Blender.
> They are volunteers.  Making the training available to them is a different
> issue to making it mandatory.
>
> There is an issue of trust, locally the American Red Cross has hit the
> headlines with their six permanent houses built in Haiti.  Divide into the
> money raised and its not pretty.  There has been mention of the
> Humanitarian Industry.  There is a suggestion that the NGOs look upon
> mapathons as a way of engaging the public hoping to gain donations from
> them.
>
> I've long thought that many projects could have better documentation.  Why
> is this project important? who will use the data that we know about?  This
> is being addressed through the training for project managers.
>
> For a crisis certain projects will need a higher level of expertise.  I've
> worked on critical high priority projects where tiles have been marked done
> with only 25% of the mapping done.  Other tiles had been "validated" but
> still left much to be desired, and my standard of validation isn't that
> high.
>
> Validating and giving feedback is useful.  Quite a few of the new mappers
> I've given feedback to are now solid mappers but quick feedback is critical
> and when you get twenty or more mappers mapping in a mapathon you can't
> give each the attention you'd like.
>
> By the way it doesn't seem to be just HOT mappers who leave much to be
> desired.  I've been looking at parts of Africa and there are mappers there
> who have done a fair amount of mapping more than 500 buildings for example
> but still don't tag their ways and their userid does not show up in HOT.
>
> I'll leave you the thoughts but no real solutions.
>
> Cheerio 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] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[john whelan]

​I think we have to accept we need new mappers and we need them to be
motivated so mapping projects that do not seem important ​may not be so
motivating.  The Statistics Canada project is interesting as in the longer
term I think we should see a pool of experienced mappers coming out of that
but it is a longer term project and its interesting to see a different
approach with more emphasis on data quality.  We rarely discuss the needs
of our clients ie those who use the maps in the discussion group.

Mapping one on one with new mappers you can train them fairly quickly but
it still takes twenty minutes or so.  With a group I think you have to
accept you have them there for two/three hours, 50% will never map again,
and they want to start mapping now.  What's the guy at the front talking
about OpenStreetMap and boring stuff for?  Asking them to train for two
hours first and get a badge is a sort of non-starter.  Ask me to go through
training for validation and I'm more likely to go off and play in Blender.
They are volunteers.  Making the training available to them is a different
issue to making it mandatory.

There is an issue of trust, locally the American Red Cross has hit the
headlines with their six permanent houses built in Haiti.  Divide into the
money raised and its not pretty.  There has been mention of the
Humanitarian Industry.  There is a suggestion that the NGOs look upon
mapathons as a way of engaging the public hoping to gain donations from
them.

I've long thought that many projects could have better documentation.  Why
is this project important? who will use the data that we know about?  This
is being addressed through the training for project managers.

For a crisis certain projects will need a higher level of expertise.  I've
worked on critical high priority projects where tiles have been marked done
with only 25% of the mapping done.  Other tiles had been "validated" but
still left much to be desired, and my standard of validation isn't that
high.

Validating and giving feedback is useful.  Quite a few of the new mappers
I've given feedback to are now solid mappers but quick feedback is critical
and when you get twenty or more mappers mapping in a mapathon you can't
give each the attention you'd like.

By the way it doesn't seem to be just HOT mappers who leave much to be
desired.  I've been looking at parts of Africa and there are mappers there
who have done a fair amount of mapping more than 500 buildings for example
but still don't tag their ways and their userid does not show up in HOT.

I'll leave you the thoughts but no real solutions.

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

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Phil (The Geek) Wyatt]

"Having said that, I'd like to punt this back to Phil and Sev as I speak to 
people in the field, who use the data, on a regular basis. Data quality, so 
far, has almost never come up as an issue. Do you guys have different 
experience or feedback from field teams? It would be useful to know specifics 
if you have.

Cheers, Pete

Hi Pete,

Despite being a mapper for Red Cross, all my work is in Australia where I 
generally have access to relatively high quality Government spatial data. My 
interest in OSM/HOT is in support of international projects and where possible 
I would love to see the best quality digitising regardless of who is doing the 
work.

I know I made mistakes as a newbie as I just dived in and had a go (typical 
Aussie approach!) and I suspect many first time mappers do just that, despite 
there now being good tutorials around on many aspects of ID/JOSM Editor. Slowly 
I found more details and have since gone back to some areas I mapped originally 
to square up buildings and do other tidying. I also started mapping in my local 
area until I found the HOT site so I had some experience when diving into the 
humanitarian work.

I suspect you are right that any mapping is better than none for many 
humanitarian projects and initial quality issues are probably overlooked but we 
should endeavour to always improve. Leaving the least number of 'errors' for 
the locals to clean up is a worthy goal.

A more refined web interface where actual projects are further down the page 
with the initial splash screen asking folks to complete some minimal training 
does not seem that onerous to me. Even a tabbed interface, to split off harder 
tasks with specific notes in the header regarding the type of work that will be 
involved, would make it easier to explain levels of tasks and preferred 
competencies.

/ New mappers \ / Harder Tasks \ /Complex Tasks \ / Validation \

New mappers.

Tasks in this group are ideal for new mappers using the ID interface.  Check 
out the videos below to understand how best to undertake the mapping and how 
the data is used by requesting organisations. After the videos, select a task 
from the projects below. There will be more specific instructions under each 
task.

Adding Roads Video

 

Mapping Residential Boundaries Video

 

Task 1

Task2

Task 3

--

I hope these thoughts are useful and I am happy to help out testing any new 
interface. I am not a coder but work with lots of volunteers so have a fair 
idea how they think and work.

 

Cheers - Phil

 

Volunteer Mapper (GISMO) -   Red 
Cross,   Wildcare Volunteer

 

 

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

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Joseph Reeves]

Thanks Robert, that's a sound justification.

I know many of us have had discussions with the wider OSM community about
the merits of remote mapping and the impact this may have on local groups.

I'm pleased to see the discussion here and hope there are solutions that
benefit both mappers, aid orgs and the OSM ecosystem.

Cheers, Joseph




On 13 October 2016 at 11:39, Robert Banick  wrote:

> I’m an occasional humanitarian and agree with Pete that I’ve never heard
> serious complaints from humanitarian actors about the quality of the OSM
> data. Certainly no one has said it would be preferable to having no data at
> all.
>
> However, we need to be sensitive to the local OSM communities who will
> clean up any bad data mess we leave behind. I live in Nepal now and
> recently did some mapping work in an area traced by HOT after the Nepal
> earthquake. The quality was sometimes bad and cleanup was time consuming.
>
> I recognize that it was much, much better to have the data there during
> the response. It was much, much better to have the data there for my
> project even. But that’s no reason not to aspire to better data in the long
> term.
>
> OSM is not just a humanitarian platform, it’s also a worldwide community
> with many non-humanitarian uses. As heavy users we have a special
> obligation to respect that and maybe work a little harder to get our data
> to “good” instead of “good enough”. I don’t know whether that’s possible
> but we should at least try.
>
> I don’t mean this to take away from the positive discussion with lots of
> interesting ideas here. I completely agree that we should stay as open as
> possible to new mappers and while making HOT mapping a more guided process
> with appropriate safeguards.
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:54 PM Joseph Reeves 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> "Having said that, I'd like to punt this back to Phil and Sev as I speak
>> to people in the field, who use the data, on a regular basis. Data quality,
>> so far, has almost never come up as an issue. Do you guys have different
>> experience or feedback from field teams? It would be useful to know
>> specifics if you have."
>>
>> This was the question I've been thinking about for a while now and now
>> might be an appropriate time to bring it up. Pete said it better than I
>> could!
>>
>> In short - do square buildings matter for disaster relief mapping? Is
>> there an acceptable trade-off between mapping quality and response time?
>>
>> That's a general question which I think needs to be informed with more
>> specifics to this case, starting with:
>>
>> What is the OpenStreetMap data going to be used for?
>> If we're creating population estimates of an area, is it enough to know
>> the number of buildings or will the geometries be important?
>> What organisation requested the data?
>> What feedback have you received from people on the ground?
>>
>> Sev, you've said "Mapping in OSM in crisis response is not an exciting
>> one-shot hobby", which I can agree with, but if we're going for
>> professionalism I think we should consider the above questions, and plenty
>> more than I'm sure others will have. Anyone can install a copy of the
>> Tasking Manager and get together a skilled group of OSM Humanitarian
>> mappers to engage in crises response, but without a requesting organisation
>> providing goals and feedback it's surely still just a well organised hobby?
>>
>> Personally I've always wondered if we could just use nodes for buildings.
>> We'd get the work done much quicker that way, but it may not look so good
>> on map!
>>
>> Cheers, Joseph
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 13 October 2016 at 07:43, Pete Masters 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Data quality is a major issue I think. And I think especially validation.
>> Firstly, that validators are barely recognised in the current tasking
>> manager and secondly that anyone can validate.
>>
>> In MSF, people who are unfamiliar with OSM are much reassured that there
>> is a validation process. However, a short browse of the tasking manager
>> tells you that many projects are not totally validated (despite the
>> incredible efforts of the validators in the community). For me there is a
>> significant risk here of losing the trust of the people who use the data.
>>
>> Having said that, I'd like to punt this back to Phil and Sev as I speak
>> to people in the field, who use the data, on a regular basis. Data quality,
>> so far, has almost never come up as an issue. Do you guys have different
>> experience or feedback from field teams? It would be useful to know
>> specifics if you have.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Pete
>>
>> On 13 Oct 2016 07:31, "Robert Banick"  wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> HOT is clearly one of, if not the, most successful crowdsourcing projects
>> for humanitarian response in the world. Success means not just contributors
>> but also use of the data by actual humanitarians. It’s 

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Robert Banick]

I’m an occasional humanitarian and agree with Pete that I’ve never heard
serious complaints from humanitarian actors about the quality of the OSM
data. Certainly no one has said it would be preferable to having no data at
all.

However, we need to be sensitive to the local OSM communities who will
clean up any bad data mess we leave behind. I live in Nepal now and
recently did some mapping work in an area traced by HOT after the Nepal
earthquake. The quality was sometimes bad and cleanup was time consuming.

I recognize that it was much, much better to have the data there during the
response. It was much, much better to have the data there for my project
even. But that’s no reason not to aspire to better data in the long term.

OSM is not just a humanitarian platform, it’s also a worldwide community
with many non-humanitarian uses. As heavy users we have a special
obligation to respect that and maybe work a little harder to get our data
to “good” instead of “good enough”. I don’t know whether that’s possible
but we should at least try.

I don’t mean this to take away from the positive discussion with lots of
interesting ideas here. I completely agree that we should stay as open as
possible to new mappers and while making HOT mapping a more guided process
with appropriate safeguards.

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:54 PM Joseph Reeves  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> "Having said that, I'd like to punt this back to Phil and Sev as I speak
> to people in the field, who use the data, on a regular basis. Data quality,
> so far, has almost never come up as an issue. Do you guys have different
> experience or feedback from field teams? It would be useful to know
> specifics if you have."
>
> This was the question I've been thinking about for a while now and now
> might be an appropriate time to bring it up. Pete said it better than I
> could!
>
> In short - do square buildings matter for disaster relief mapping? Is
> there an acceptable trade-off between mapping quality and response time?
>
> That's a general question which I think needs to be informed with more
> specifics to this case, starting with:
>
> What is the OpenStreetMap data going to be used for?
> If we're creating population estimates of an area, is it enough to know
> the number of buildings or will the geometries be important?
> What organisation requested the data?
> What feedback have you received from people on the ground?
>
> Sev, you've said "Mapping in OSM in crisis response is not an exciting
> one-shot hobby", which I can agree with, but if we're going for
> professionalism I think we should consider the above questions, and plenty
> more than I'm sure others will have. Anyone can install a copy of the
> Tasking Manager and get together a skilled group of OSM Humanitarian
> mappers to engage in crises response, but without a requesting organisation
> providing goals and feedback it's surely still just a well organised hobby?
>
> Personally I've always wondered if we could just use nodes for buildings.
> We'd get the work done much quicker that way, but it may not look so good
> on map!
>
> Cheers, Joseph
>
>
>
>
> On 13 October 2016 at 07:43, Pete Masters 
> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Data quality is a major issue I think. And I think especially validation.
> Firstly, that validators are barely recognised in the current tasking
> manager and secondly that anyone can validate.
>
> In MSF, people who are unfamiliar with OSM are much reassured that there
> is a validation process. However, a short browse of the tasking manager
> tells you that many projects are not totally validated (despite the
> incredible efforts of the validators in the community). For me there is a
> significant risk here of losing the trust of the people who use the data.
>
> Having said that, I'd like to punt this back to Phil and Sev as I speak to
> people in the field, who use the data, on a regular basis. Data quality, so
> far, has almost never come up as an issue. Do you guys have different
> experience or feedback from field teams? It would be useful to know
> specifics if you have.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pete
>
> On 13 Oct 2016 07:31, "Robert Banick"  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> HOT is clearly one of, if not the, most successful crowdsourcing projects
> for humanitarian response in the world. Success means not just contributors
> but also use of the data by actual humanitarians. It’s unsurprising we’re
> encountering some limits to the approach and need to evolve it.
>
> I like Phil and John’s automated approach to these things. I think the
> Tasking Manager has proven that the best way to manage these interactions
> is through an automated platform. My only concern is making what’s
> currently straightforward overly complex and intimidating for new users.
> But that’s a call for good design and introductory materials, not dumbing
> down our approach.
>
> However, it’s the middle of a disaster and clearly not the time for

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Jo]

Since it's so easy to create square buildings (in JOSM, that is), it should
be unacceptable to not square them. (If they are rectangular, of course).
We want to map what's there in reality, as closely as practically feasible.

Polyglot

2016-10-13 12:09 GMT+02:00 Joseph Reeves :

> Hi all,
>
> "Having said that, I'd like to punt this back to Phil and Sev as I speak
> to people in the field, who use the data, on a regular basis. Data quality,
> so far, has almost never come up as an issue. Do you guys have different
> experience or feedback from field teams? It would be useful to know
> specifics if you have."
>
> This was the question I've been thinking about for a while now and now
> might be an appropriate time to bring it up. Pete said it better than I
> could!
>
> In short - do square buildings matter for disaster relief mapping? Is
> there an acceptable trade-off between mapping quality and response time?
>
> That's a general question which I think needs to be informed with more
> specifics to this case, starting with:
>
> What is the OpenStreetMap data going to be used for?
> If we're creating population estimates of an area, is it enough to know
> the number of buildings or will the geometries be important?
> What organisation requested the data?
> What feedback have you received from people on the ground?
>
> Sev, you've said "Mapping in OSM in crisis response is not an exciting
> one-shot hobby", which I can agree with, but if we're going for
> professionalism I think we should consider the above questions, and plenty
> more than I'm sure others will have. Anyone can install a copy of the
> Tasking Manager and get together a skilled group of OSM Humanitarian
> mappers to engage in crises response, but without a requesting organisation
> providing goals and feedback it's surely still just a well organised hobby?
>
> Personally I've always wondered if we could just use nodes for buildings.
> We'd get the work done much quicker that way, but it may not look so good
> on map!
>
> Cheers, Joseph
>
>
>
>
> On 13 October 2016 at 07:43, Pete Masters 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Data quality is a major issue I think. And I think especially validation.
>> Firstly, that validators are barely recognised in the current tasking
>> manager and secondly that anyone can validate.
>>
>> In MSF, people who are unfamiliar with OSM are much reassured that there
>> is a validation process. However, a short browse of the tasking manager
>> tells you that many projects are not totally validated (despite the
>> incredible efforts of the validators in the community). For me there is a
>> significant risk here of losing the trust of the people who use the data.
>>
>> Having said that, I'd like to punt this back to Phil and Sev as I speak
>> to people in the field, who use the data, on a regular basis. Data quality,
>> so far, has almost never come up as an issue. Do you guys have different
>> experience or feedback from field teams? It would be useful to know
>> specifics if you have.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Pete
>>
>> On 13 Oct 2016 07:31, "Robert Banick"  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> HOT is clearly one of, if not the, most successful crowdsourcing
>>> projects for humanitarian response in the world. Success means not just
>>> contributors but also use of the data by actual humanitarians. It’s
>>> unsurprising we’re encountering some limits to the approach and need to
>>> evolve it.
>>>
>>> I like Phil and John’s automated approach to these things. I think the
>>> Tasking Manager has proven that the best way to manage these interactions
>>> is through an automated platform. My only concern is making what’s
>>> currently straightforward overly complex and intimidating for new users.
>>> But that’s a call for good design and introductory materials, not dumbing
>>> down our approach.
>>>
>>> However, it’s the middle of a disaster and clearly not the time for
>>> wholesale changes. I suggest we flag these thoughts for the forthcoming
>>> Tasking Manager redesign and embrace makeshift systems in the meantime.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Robert
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 8:31 AM Phil (The Geek) Wyatt <
>>> p...@wyatt-family.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Folks,



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



 I have no 

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Joseph Reeves]

Hi all,

"Having said that, I'd like to punt this back to Phil and Sev as I speak to
people in the field, who use the data, on a regular basis. Data quality, so
far, has almost never come up as an issue. Do you guys have different
experience or feedback from field teams? It would be useful to know
specifics if you have."

This was the question I've been thinking about for a while now and now
might be an appropriate time to bring it up. Pete said it better than I
could!

In short - do square buildings matter for disaster relief mapping? Is there
an acceptable trade-off between mapping quality and response time?

That's a general question which I think needs to be informed with more
specifics to this case, starting with:

What is the OpenStreetMap data going to be used for?
If we're creating population estimates of an area, is it enough to know the
number of buildings or will the geometries be important?
What organisation requested the data?
What feedback have you received from people on the ground?

Sev, you've said "Mapping in OSM in crisis response is not an exciting
one-shot hobby", which I can agree with, but if we're going for
professionalism I think we should consider the above questions, and plenty
more than I'm sure others will have. Anyone can install a copy of the
Tasking Manager and get together a skilled group of OSM Humanitarian
mappers to engage in crises response, but without a requesting organisation
providing goals and feedback it's surely still just a well organised hobby?

Personally I've always wondered if we could just use nodes for buildings.
We'd get the work done much quicker that way, but it may not look so good
on map!

Cheers, Joseph




On 13 October 2016 at 07:43, Pete Masters 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Data quality is a major issue I think. And I think especially validation.
> Firstly, that validators are barely recognised in the current tasking
> manager and secondly that anyone can validate.
>
> In MSF, people who are unfamiliar with OSM are much reassured that there
> is a validation process. However, a short browse of the tasking manager
> tells you that many projects are not totally validated (despite the
> incredible efforts of the validators in the community). For me there is a
> significant risk here of losing the trust of the people who use the data.
>
> Having said that, I'd like to punt this back to Phil and Sev as I speak to
> people in the field, who use the data, on a regular basis. Data quality, so
> far, has almost never come up as an issue. Do you guys have different
> experience or feedback from field teams? It would be useful to know
> specifics if you have.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pete
>
> On 13 Oct 2016 07:31, "Robert Banick"  wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> HOT is clearly one of, if not the, most successful crowdsourcing projects
>> for humanitarian response in the world. Success means not just contributors
>> but also use of the data by actual humanitarians. It’s unsurprising we’re
>> encountering some limits to the approach and need to evolve it.
>>
>> I like Phil and John’s automated approach to these things. I think the
>> Tasking Manager has proven that the best way to manage these interactions
>> is through an automated platform. My only concern is making what’s
>> currently straightforward overly complex and intimidating for new users.
>> But that’s a call for good design and introductory materials, not dumbing
>> down our approach.
>>
>> However, it’s the middle of a disaster and clearly not the time for
>> wholesale changes. I suggest we flag these thoughts for the forthcoming
>> Tasking Manager redesign and embrace makeshift systems in the meantime.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Robert
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 8:31 AM Phil (The Geek) Wyatt <
>> p...@wyatt-family.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am a retired long time map user, occasional mapper (in QGIS, Mapinfo)
>>> and supporter of the OSM mapping project. It seems to me that the issue of
>>> poor mapping, especially for HOT projects, is coming up on such a regular
>>> basis that it's time to consider some mandatory training for users before
>>> they get to map under the HOT task manager. I don't think this would be too
>>> difficult for most volunteers and it could ensure that at least a certain
>>> level of competency is attained before being exposed to complex tasks. If
>>> people know that in the first place then they can make a choice as to
>>> whether they commence or continue to map.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have no idea how this could be accomplished as I know little of the
>>> linkages between OSM and the HOT Task Manager, but restricting HOT tasks to
>>> those with some defined training could improve the results.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Let's say as a minimum you train folks on roads and residential area
>>> polygons - that might be level 1 (ID Editor)
>>>
>>> Level 2 could be after training for buildings, tracks, paths (ID or JOSM)
>>>
>>> Level 3 for validation 

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Maurizio Napolitano]

Hi
I want share with you my idea. In Madrid, during the IODC conference,
I spoke with Heather.
I think that we can imagine a system that, by starting from the login
to http://tasks.hotosm.org/, calculates a value of "trust" of a
contributor.
As starting job we can use the wonderful work made by Pascal Neis for
"How did you contribute to OpenStreetMap" - http://hdyc.neis-one.org//
If the user has a good experience, the system offers the new task to
solve, otherwise, the system drives the newbie in a "virtual course"
to increase the experience.
The "virtual course" offers, to the newbies, some tasks well known to
use as gym to increase the osm experience.
What do you think?

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

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Arun Ganesh]

The future of HOT will be in more local mappers joining tasks, and we will
definitely have to remain open to having greater number of first time OSM
contributors with no prior experience and not fluent in English.

The core of the problem is that contributors have access to powerful
editing tools that they may not know how to correctly use [1]. Lets always
create great documentation, but more importantly we need some mechanism to
ensure that a contributor has read and understood it before contributing.

[1] https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/3142

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 1:33 AM, Romain Bousson 
wrote:

> Hi all,
> As a pretty newcomer in the osm and hot communities, I personnaly had the
> feeling that the 3 first tabs "Description / instructions / Contribute"
> could be very easily enhanced, by just improving the text and its
> organisation. Today, as I see the new #2228 - Hurricane Matthew: Jereme
> Post Event Imagery , instructions,
> I see that there had been some improvements :)
> I do not complain, and I applaud all the work done by HOT, but I think my
> following comments and ideas could be helpful :
>
>
>- Description tab : often the same text for all the different Haïti
>projects. The general context is well explained, but we may miss some
>important context elements on the practical things (hearthquake in 2010,
>the date of the Bing imagery, the date of the new imagery).
>
>- Instructions tab: it was not explained how to use the new Digital
>Globe imagery in iD. IMHO, only the link is not enough: some people may say
>that it's only a strange line in the instructions and ignore it. The
>hierarchy of the informations provided on this tab is not adequate and
>almost inverted imho. What to do when 2 imageries coexist really missed me.
>The only information was the type of "use imageries in that order : DG,
>Bing, Mapbox", but we can identify simple and common cases that could be
>explained in a Frequently Asquesd Questions or something : what to do when
>a house is already mapped, appears on ancient imagery, and is not here
>anymore with the new imagery etc.
>
>- Contribute tab: maybe a reminder to read the instructions, and/or a
>phrase saying that "If you know what you are doing, you can validate, if
>not, you may let more experienced user take this role". The accessibility
>of the tiles given to only  users who have a certain level, as previously
>said, is a good and interesting idea, but is pretty drastic and limits
>freedom, wich is one of the powers of crowdsourcing. Ensuring a good
>instruction, and ensuring  a good peer-review by experienced users and not
>newcomers is what I think the most important.
>
>
> This said, I agree that all the main instructions are already here, on the
> welcome page and the tabs, but we still see people not reading them, so it
> will be a choice to make by HOT community wether we keep users who do not
> read them to be free to map badly or not.
>
>
> Here are an other famous crowdsourced project that has fine tutorials in
> my opinion. I put 2 links for people who do not know them, it could inspire
> us for the HOT improvements (pay attention to the explanations given in the
> tutorials) :
> https://www.zooniverse.org/projects/povich/milky-way-project
> https://www.zooniverse.org/projects/dwright04/supernova-hunters/classify
>
> @Dale : thank you for your answer! No problemo I understand that you were
> busy. I hope I did not spam you too much, sory about that :D
>
> Thanks for everything,
> Romain
>
> ___
> 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] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Martin Noblecourt]

Dear all,

This is obviously a key topic that have been around, actually way before 
I was there in the OSM community ;-)


I completely agree with Séverin's warning and the comments from 
subsequent speakers.


To me we already have elements of the solution:

1. As expressed by John & Mikel, improving the TM can certainly help. I
   also suggested recently to split clearly the beginners projects from
   the rest on the homepage (and only make the advanced one visible by
   opening a menu/clicking a button, that would already prevent quite a
   few beginners access them I think). That implies also a clearer
   documentation/research on what is a beginner/medium/advanced tasks,
   based on emergency situation, features, imagery...
2. As a quick fix, some basic phrasing/warnings on the tasks could also
   be improved/increased. E.g. are we sure all new mappers go to the
   "Instructions" tab? Else a sentence in bold in tab one "Make sure to
   read instructions tab" could already help?
3. As expressed by Séverin & Heather, tweaking the TM will not do all
   and training will remain paramount. EOF is a great example of
   focusing on training a few quality mappers (particularly for African
   countries contexts), I think Missing Maps' repeated mapathons
   (specially in London) are also a good example and maybe more adapted
   to Western countries contexts. This is also why we focus mostly on
   non-disaster settings with MM, except with contributors with some
   experience.
4. Regular mapathons/in-depths training are the only way to train
   validators, a resource we are short on. As discussed regularly with
   the Missing Maps members, we also lack incentive/recognition for
   validators, this should be taken into account in the new TM.

I'll conclude by seconding Pete that the overall quality of data of OSM 
is mostly deemed as good by the humanitarians users we are & see - as 
expressed via the feedback from NGOs to contributors we're trying to 
develop.


So thanks to the whole community and let's continue improving.

Best

Martin



On 13/10/2016 08:57, hot-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:

--


--

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 16:57:40 -0400
From: Dale Kunce 
To: Romain Bousson 
Cc: "hot@openstreetmap.org" 
Subject: Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve
Message-ID:

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Romain Bousson]

Hi all,
As a pretty newcomer in the osm and hot communities, I personnaly had the
feeling that the 3 first tabs "Description / instructions / Contribute"
could be very easily enhanced, by just improving the text and its
organisation. Today, as I see the new #2228 - Hurricane Matthew: Jereme
Post Event Imagery , instructions, I
see that there had been some improvements :)
I do not complain, and I applaud all the work done by HOT, but I think my
following comments and ideas could be helpful :


   - Description tab : often the same text for all the different Haïti
   projects. The general context is well explained, but we may miss some
   important context elements on the practical things (hearthquake in 2010,
   the date of the Bing imagery, the date of the new imagery).

   - Instructions tab: it was not explained how to use the new Digital
   Globe imagery in iD. IMHO, only the link is not enough: some people may say
   that it's only a strange line in the instructions and ignore it. The
   hierarchy of the informations provided on this tab is not adequate and
   almost inverted imho. What to do when 2 imageries coexist really missed me.
   The only information was the type of "use imageries in that order : DG,
   Bing, Mapbox", but we can identify simple and common cases that could be
   explained in a Frequently Asquesd Questions or something : what to do when
   a house is already mapped, appears on ancient imagery, and is not here
   anymore with the new imagery etc.

   - Contribute tab: maybe a reminder to read the instructions, and/or a
   phrase saying that "If you know what you are doing, you can validate, if
   not, you may let more experienced user take this role". The accessibility
   of the tiles given to only  users who have a certain level, as previously
   said, is a good and interesting idea, but is pretty drastic and limits
   freedom, wich is one of the powers of crowdsourcing. Ensuring a good
   instruction, and ensuring  a good peer-review by experienced users and not
   newcomers is what I think the most important.


This said, I agree that all the main instructions are already here, on the
welcome page and the tabs, but we still see people not reading them, so it
will be a choice to make by HOT community wether we keep users who do not
read them to be free to map badly or not.


Here are an other famous crowdsourced project that has fine tutorials in my
opinion. I put 2 links for people who do not know them, it could inspire us
for the HOT improvements (pay attention to the explanations given in the
tutorials) :
https://www.zooniverse.org/projects/povich/milky-way-project
https://www.zooniverse.org/projects/dwright04/supernova-hunters/classify

@Dale : thank you for your answer! No problemo I understand that you were
busy. I hope I did not spam you too much, sory about that :D

Thanks for everything,
Romain
___
HOT mailing list
HOT@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Laura O'Grady]

Hi all,

Experienced mappers and validators - I feel your pain. Along with others 
including Séverin, Mikel, Romain and Phil (as cited below) I agree with your 
comments and concerns. 

I've been checking in with the TM here and there, trying to help out with the 
recent crisis and noticed a lot of keen but but very green mappers doing their 
best but frankly are just not up to speed. This can cause a lot of (needless) 
work for others. 

As others have noted I think we need to re-evaluate training/participation in 
this context. 

I've made a suggestion to the Training Working Group that we set up a mandatory 
2 (or so) hour training/testing session for new mappers in a crisis scenario. I 
believe that if someone has the time to sign up and participate in a mapathon, 
where some of these problems are generated then I also believe they should be 
able to commit to some advance preparation. Of course we would not turn away 
any volunteers at a mapathon who were unable to compete the 2 hour course.

To that end I suggest setting up a formal course in a MOOC such as Udemy that 
currently offers a platform for elearning including video, text, message forums 
and quizzes, which could accommodate some of the levels Phil (cited below) has 
suggested. 

As Heather pointed out its time to move forward to a formal peer-to-peer 
learning model. These are key components in collaborative learning and this 
system can accommodate this type of learning. 

I've suggested this to the TrWG but not received any real concrete feedback.

I would be happy to take the lead and set up the curriculum using materials we 
already have (videos, documents from LearnOSM and wiki.openstreeetmap.org, for 
example).  

I think in the long run it would be a win-win as we'd have a ready made course 
for crisis scenarios/mapathon preparation and it would always be available as 
course in the MOOC listings to attract new mappers to OSM/HOT at any point in 
time.

I would need assistance from the community to test the course before roll out.

Thoughts?

Thanks for any feedback.

Best wishes,

Laura

-
Laura O'Grady, PhD
la...@lauraogrady.ca

> 
> 
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 17:34:15 +
> From: Severin Menard 
> To: "hot@openstreetmap.org" 
> Subject: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve
> Message-ID:
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> The edits on hotosm.org job #2228 
> have started and now happens what I feared. There is no mention of what are
> the necessary skills and newbies are coming with a lot of enthusiasm but
> with almost no OSM experience. A quick analysis of the first 29
> contributors shows that 20 of them have created their OSM account less than
> one month ago. Some did it yesterday or today. Wow.
> 
> The result of that : obviously, crappy edits are coming, spoiling what we
> have been doing over the last few days : now we have building as nodes
> where shapes are totally visible, un-squared bad shaped buildings and the
> main landuse area is self-cutting in various places (see there
> ).
> 
> Nothing new under the sun : it was already the case for Haiti EarthQuake
> 2010. Quite a pity that six years after, despite the OSM tools have
> improved a lot, it remains the same. It is though quite simple to fix the
> most part of it: do-not-invite-newcomers-to-map-over-complex-crisis-
> contexts.
> 
> I guess some will argue that the OSM newcomers are people of good will and
> that they just want to help and that they my feel offended/discouraged. Of
> course their intentions are high and yes they may feel a bit hurt. But this
> is really a classic in humanitarian response: people with the best
> intentions in the world may not fit for it, just because they are not
> experienced yet.
> 
> Mapping in OSM in crisis response is not an exciting one-shot hobby : it
> does have its learning curve and it is key to learn how to map correctly
> before being dropped over complex humanitarian contexts. This is why I
> mentioned three sets of necessary skills for the jobs I created these last
> days on http://taches.francophonelibre.org. And the beginner mappers who
> joined the job that fitted for beginners are people that already have a few
> months of OSM experience, not newcomers. Newcomers should be driven over
> non urgent fields.
> 
> If someone is not interested to learn first in not a mass media covered
> crisis context : this is not a problem, it is actually a good way to see
> real motivations. I personally prefer to get one mapper that will become a
> huge, excellent contributor, 3-4 more occasional but still producing neat
> data, than to lose 10 that would create crappy objects and just leave
> forever afterwards anyway.
> 
> I guess the resulting need of 

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Heather Leson]

I've shared this video before, but I think it would be good for us to
consider for TM and Community Management (post-emergency)

How can we learn from other Open Source communities?  What are the
contributor metrics and engagement touchpoints (see the Mozilla dashboard
on the video)?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvteDoRSRr8  (14 minutes)

Heather


Heather Leson
heatherle...@gmail.com
Twitter/skype: HeatherLeson
Blog: textontechs.com

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Pete Masters 
wrote:

> Apologies for a second email in succession but Jo reminded me of my
> original thoughts when I read Sev's first email.
>
> Firstly, I agree that a hugely committed mapper or 3 / 4 regular mappers
> are preferable to 10 one-time mappers, but I think that's probably slightly
> naive. From what I remember of Martin Dittus' research (and apologies if I
> have misremembered, Martin) you need to engage with many more than ten new
> mappers to find even one regular one (and this is in a regular mapathon
> setting where there is training and community). Also, some of the most
> committed humanitarian mappers were, once upon a time, newbies. How do you
> find those hard core HOT mappers of the future without looking?
>
> Secondly, I think new mappers are a great thing. We need them. MSF
> certainly needs them. The appetite for the kind of speed, quality and
> coverage you guys provide so well is growing fast. In terms of tasking, I
> have a backlog of more than ten projects that I haven't even put into the
> tasking manager yet. None of them are mapping for crises that make the
> news. And I know that we can't, as a community, handle these extra requests
> without growing significantly. That means inviting new people.
>
> Lastly, I have seen rooms full of new mappers provide operational data for
> field teams on urgent request. Mapping for the MSF measles vaccination on
> the island of Idjwi in DRC is a good case in point. Experienced HOT mappers
> were instrumental in checking the quality of the data, but new mappers in
> Glasgow and all over Belgium turned a likely failure into an astonishing
> success by doing the initial mapping at speed and with enthusiasm. This
> should be celebrated.
>
> If we curb the number of new mappers coming into this space, we will have
> to say no to a lot more requests from serious NGOs doing serious work.
> Better,  I would think, to work out how their time is most effectively
> spent however long they stay for... and to work out how to encourage them
> to stay for a while. My feeling is that criticising them en masse for
> spoiling data on the mailing list might be counter productive to this.
>
> Pete
>
> On 13 Oct 2016 08:02, "Jo"  wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately there will constantly be new crises. So we'll always be 'in
>> the middle of a crisis'.
>>
>> Polyglot
>>
>> 2016-10-13 8:29 GMT+02:00 Robert Banick :
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> HOT is clearly one of, if not the, most successful crowdsourcing
>>> projects for humanitarian response in the world. Success means not just
>>> contributors but also use of the data by actual humanitarians. It’s
>>> unsurprising we’re encountering some limits to the approach and need to
>>> evolve it.
>>>
>>> I like Phil and John’s automated approach to these things. I think the
>>> Tasking Manager has proven that the best way to manage these interactions
>>> is through an automated platform. My only concern is making what’s
>>> currently straightforward overly complex and intimidating for new users.
>>> But that’s a call for good design and introductory materials, not dumbing
>>> down our approach.
>>>
>>> However, it’s the middle of a disaster and clearly not the time for
>>> wholesale changes. I suggest we flag these thoughts for the forthcoming
>>> Tasking Manager redesign and embrace makeshift systems in the meantime.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Robert
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 8:31 AM Phil (The Geek) Wyatt <
>>> p...@wyatt-family.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Folks,



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



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



 Let's 

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Pete Masters]

Apologies for a second email in succession but Jo reminded me of my
original thoughts when I read Sev's first email.

Firstly, I agree that a hugely committed mapper or 3 / 4 regular mappers
are preferable to 10 one-time mappers, but I think that's probably slightly
naive. From what I remember of Martin Dittus' research (and apologies if I
have misremembered, Martin) you need to engage with many more than ten new
mappers to find even one regular one (and this is in a regular mapathon
setting where there is training and community). Also, some of the most
committed humanitarian mappers were, once upon a time, newbies. How do you
find those hard core HOT mappers of the future without looking?

Secondly, I think new mappers are a great thing. We need them. MSF
certainly needs them. The appetite for the kind of speed, quality and
coverage you guys provide so well is growing fast. In terms of tasking, I
have a backlog of more than ten projects that I haven't even put into the
tasking manager yet. None of them are mapping for crises that make the
news. And I know that we can't, as a community, handle these extra requests
without growing significantly. That means inviting new people.

Lastly, I have seen rooms full of new mappers provide operational data for
field teams on urgent request. Mapping for the MSF measles vaccination on
the island of Idjwi in DRC is a good case in point. Experienced HOT mappers
were instrumental in checking the quality of the data, but new mappers in
Glasgow and all over Belgium turned a likely failure into an astonishing
success by doing the initial mapping at speed and with enthusiasm. This
should be celebrated.

If we curb the number of new mappers coming into this space, we will have
to say no to a lot more requests from serious NGOs doing serious work.
Better,  I would think, to work out how their time is most effectively
spent however long they stay for... and to work out how to encourage them
to stay for a while. My feeling is that criticising them en masse for
spoiling data on the mailing list might be counter productive to this.

Pete

On 13 Oct 2016 08:02, "Jo"  wrote:

> Unfortunately there will constantly be new crises. So we'll always be 'in
> the middle of a crisis'.
>
> Polyglot
>
> 2016-10-13 8:29 GMT+02:00 Robert Banick :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> HOT is clearly one of, if not the, most successful crowdsourcing projects
>> for humanitarian response in the world. Success means not just contributors
>> but also use of the data by actual humanitarians. It’s unsurprising we’re
>> encountering some limits to the approach and need to evolve it.
>>
>> I like Phil and John’s automated approach to these things. I think the
>> Tasking Manager has proven that the best way to manage these interactions
>> is through an automated platform. My only concern is making what’s
>> currently straightforward overly complex and intimidating for new users.
>> But that’s a call for good design and introductory materials, not dumbing
>> down our approach.
>>
>> However, it’s the middle of a disaster and clearly not the time for
>> wholesale changes. I suggest we flag these thoughts for the forthcoming
>> Tasking Manager redesign and embrace makeshift systems in the meantime.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Robert
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 8:31 AM Phil (The Geek) Wyatt <
>> p...@wyatt-family.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am a retired long time map user, occasional mapper (in QGIS, Mapinfo)
>>> and supporter of the OSM mapping project. It seems to me that the issue of
>>> poor mapping, especially for HOT projects, is coming up on such a regular
>>> basis that it's time to consider some mandatory training for users before
>>> they get to map under the HOT task manager. I don't think this would be too
>>> difficult for most volunteers and it could ensure that at least a certain
>>> level of competency is attained before being exposed to complex tasks. If
>>> people know that in the first place then they can make a choice as to
>>> whether they commence or continue to map.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have no idea how this could be accomplished as I know little of the
>>> linkages between OSM and the HOT Task Manager, but restricting HOT tasks to
>>> those with some defined training could improve the results.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Let's say as a minimum you train folks on roads and residential area
>>> polygons - that might be level 1 (ID Editor)
>>>
>>> Level 2 could be after training for buildings, tracks, paths (ID or JOSM)
>>>
>>> Level 3 for validation (JOSM)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In this way HOT tasks simply get assigned at each level and you know you
>>> have the right people doing the tasks at hand. The task manager could also
>>> only highlight jobs at their assigned level until they do the next level
>>> training.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You might even consider, as part of validation, dropping people from a
>>> higher level to a lower level if they continually fail to produce 

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Robert Banick]

Just quickly: I agree with both Heather and Jo.

I think the Tasking Manager and associated technologies are the
cornerstones on which we build mentoring, community and good practices. So
much of HOT’s way of operating in a disaster is set by the current
structure of the Tasking Manager. So if we build out a good new TM that
explicitly allows for mentoring, learning and on-boarding then we’ll be in
a better place.

Anyways for now mentoring, validating or pairing people + explicitly
inviting them onto Slack / IRC for questions is definitely necessary.

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 12:44 PM Jo  wrote:

> Unfortunately there will constantly be new crises. So we'll always be 'in
> the middle of a crisis'.
>
> Polyglot
>
> 2016-10-13 8:29 GMT+02:00 Robert Banick :
>
> Hi all,
>
> HOT is clearly one of, if not the, most successful crowdsourcing projects
> for humanitarian response in the world. Success means not just contributors
> but also use of the data by actual humanitarians. It’s unsurprising we’re
> encountering some limits to the approach and need to evolve it.
>
> I like Phil and John’s automated approach to these things. I think the
> Tasking Manager has proven that the best way to manage these interactions
> is through an automated platform. My only concern is making what’s
> currently straightforward overly complex and intimidating for new users.
> But that’s a call for good design and introductory materials, not dumbing
> down our approach.
>
> However, it’s the middle of a disaster and clearly not the time for
> wholesale changes. I suggest we flag these thoughts for the forthcoming
> Tasking Manager redesign and embrace makeshift systems in the meantime.
>
> Cheers,
> Robert
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 8:31 AM Phil (The Geek) Wyatt <
> p...@wyatt-family.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
>
>
> I am a retired long time map user, occasional mapper (in QGIS, Mapinfo)
> and supporter of the OSM mapping project. It seems to me that the issue of
> poor mapping, especially for HOT projects, is coming up on such a regular
> basis that it's time to consider some mandatory training for users before
> they get to map under the HOT task manager. I don't think this would be too
> difficult for most volunteers and it could ensure that at least a certain
> level of competency is attained before being exposed to complex tasks. If
> people know that in the first place then they can make a choice as to
> whether they commence or continue to map.
>
>
>
> I have no idea how this could be accomplished as I know little of the
> linkages between OSM and the HOT Task Manager, but restricting HOT tasks to
> those with some defined training could improve the results.
>
>
>
> Let's say as a minimum you train folks on roads and residential area
> polygons - that might be level 1 (ID Editor)
>
> Level 2 could be after training for buildings, tracks, paths (ID or JOSM)
>
> Level 3 for validation (JOSM)
>
>
>
> In this way HOT tasks simply get assigned at each level and you know you
> have the right people doing the tasks at hand. The task manager could also
> only highlight jobs at their assigned level until they do the next level
> training.
>
>
>
> You might even consider, as part of validation, dropping people from a
> higher level to a lower level if they continually fail to produce results
> at the desired consistency.
>
>
>
> Just my thoughts as a casual mapper.
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers - Phil
>
>
>
> Thin Green Line Supporter , Volunteer
> Mapper (GISMO) - Red Cross 
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Severin Menard [mailto:severin.men...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 13, 2016 4:34 AM
> *To:* hot@openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve
>
>
>
> The edits on hotosm.org job #2228 
> have started and now happens what I feared. There is no mention of what are
> the necessary skills and newbies are coming with a lot of enthusiasm but
> with almost no OSM experience. A quick analysis of the first 29
> contributors shows that 20 of them have created their OSM account less than
> one month ago. Some did it yesterday or today. Wow.
>
> The result of that : obviously, crappy edits are coming, spoiling what we
> have been doing over the last few days : now we have building as nodes
> where shapes are totally visible, un-squared bad shaped buildings and the
> main landuse area is self-cutting in various places (see there
> ).
>
> Nothing new under the sun : it was already the case for Haiti EarthQuake
> 2010. Quite a pity that six years after, despite the OSM tools have
> improved a lot, it remains the same. It is though quite simple to fix the
> most part of it:
> do-not-invite-newcomers-to-map-over-complex-crisis-contexts.
>
> I guess some will argue that the OSM newcomers are people of good 

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Jo]

Unfortunately there will constantly be new crises. So we'll always be 'in
the middle of a crisis'.

Polyglot

2016-10-13 8:29 GMT+02:00 Robert Banick :

> Hi all,
>
> HOT is clearly one of, if not the, most successful crowdsourcing projects
> for humanitarian response in the world. Success means not just contributors
> but also use of the data by actual humanitarians. It’s unsurprising we’re
> encountering some limits to the approach and need to evolve it.
>
> I like Phil and John’s automated approach to these things. I think the
> Tasking Manager has proven that the best way to manage these interactions
> is through an automated platform. My only concern is making what’s
> currently straightforward overly complex and intimidating for new users.
> But that’s a call for good design and introductory materials, not dumbing
> down our approach.
>
> However, it’s the middle of a disaster and clearly not the time for
> wholesale changes. I suggest we flag these thoughts for the forthcoming
> Tasking Manager redesign and embrace makeshift systems in the meantime.
>
> Cheers,
> Robert
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 8:31 AM Phil (The Geek) Wyatt <
> p...@wyatt-family.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am a retired long time map user, occasional mapper (in QGIS, Mapinfo)
>> and supporter of the OSM mapping project. It seems to me that the issue of
>> poor mapping, especially for HOT projects, is coming up on such a regular
>> basis that it's time to consider some mandatory training for users before
>> they get to map under the HOT task manager. I don't think this would be too
>> difficult for most volunteers and it could ensure that at least a certain
>> level of competency is attained before being exposed to complex tasks. If
>> people know that in the first place then they can make a choice as to
>> whether they commence or continue to map.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have no idea how this could be accomplished as I know little of the
>> linkages between OSM and the HOT Task Manager, but restricting HOT tasks to
>> those with some defined training could improve the results.
>>
>>
>>
>> Let's say as a minimum you train folks on roads and residential area
>> polygons - that might be level 1 (ID Editor)
>>
>> Level 2 could be after training for buildings, tracks, paths (ID or JOSM)
>>
>> Level 3 for validation (JOSM)
>>
>>
>>
>> In this way HOT tasks simply get assigned at each level and you know you
>> have the right people doing the tasks at hand. The task manager could also
>> only highlight jobs at their assigned level until they do the next level
>> training.
>>
>>
>>
>> You might even consider, as part of validation, dropping people from a
>> higher level to a lower level if they continually fail to produce results
>> at the desired consistency.
>>
>>
>>
>> Just my thoughts as a casual mapper.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers - Phil
>>
>>
>>
>> Thin Green Line Supporter , Volunteer
>> Mapper (GISMO) - Red Cross 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Severin Menard [mailto:severin.men...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 13, 2016 4:34 AM
>> *To:* hot@openstreetmap.org
>> *Subject:* [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve
>>
>>
>>
>> The edits on hotosm.org job #2228 
>> have started and now happens what I feared. There is no mention of what are
>> the necessary skills and newbies are coming with a lot of enthusiasm but
>> with almost no OSM experience. A quick analysis of the first 29
>> contributors shows that 20 of them have created their OSM account less than
>> one month ago. Some did it yesterday or today. Wow.
>>
>> The result of that : obviously, crappy edits are coming, spoiling what we
>> have been doing over the last few days : now we have building as nodes
>> where shapes are totally visible, un-squared bad shaped buildings and the
>> main landuse area is self-cutting in various places (see there
>> ).
>>
>> Nothing new under the sun : it was already the case for Haiti EarthQuake
>> 2010. Quite a pity that six years after, despite the OSM tools have
>> improved a lot, it remains the same. It is though quite simple to fix the
>> most part of it: do-not-invite-newcomers-to-map-over-complex-crisis-
>> contexts.
>>
>> I guess some will argue that the OSM newcomers are people of good will
>> and that they just want to help and that they my feel offended/discouraged.
>> Of course their intentions are high and yes they may feel a bit hurt. But
>> this is really a classic in humanitarian response: people with the best
>> intentions in the world may not fit for it, just because they are not
>> experienced yet.
>>
>>
>>
>> Mapping in OSM in crisis response is not an exciting one-shot hobby : it
>> does have its learning curve and it is key to learn how to map correctly
>> before being dropped over complex humanitarian 

Re: [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve

[Heather Leson]

Robert et al
Thanks for this conversation.

This is not just about technology. As we evolve there needs to be more
mechanisms for learning, mentoring and on boarding. One way to do that is
to pair new learners with more experienced or simply peers.

HOT and OSM are growing communities.
I welcome new people as I think this is how a healthy global community
exists.

Heather

On 13 Oct 2016 08:32, "Robert Banick"  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> HOT is clearly one of, if not the, most successful crowdsourcing projects
> for humanitarian response in the world. Success means not just contributors
> but also use of the data by actual humanitarians. It’s unsurprising we’re
> encountering some limits to the approach and need to evolve it.
>
> I like Phil and John’s automated approach to these things. I think the
> Tasking Manager has proven that the best way to manage these interactions
> is through an automated platform. My only concern is making what’s
> currently straightforward overly complex and intimidating for new users.
> But that’s a call for good design and introductory materials, not dumbing
> down our approach.
>
> However, it’s the middle of a disaster and clearly not the time for
> wholesale changes. I suggest we flag these thoughts for the forthcoming
> Tasking Manager redesign and embrace makeshift systems in the meantime.
>
> Cheers,
> Robert
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 8:31 AM Phil (The Geek) Wyatt <
> p...@wyatt-family.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am a retired long time map user, occasional mapper (in QGIS, Mapinfo)
>> and supporter of the OSM mapping project. It seems to me that the issue of
>> poor mapping, especially for HOT projects, is coming up on such a regular
>> basis that it's time to consider some mandatory training for users before
>> they get to map under the HOT task manager. I don't think this would be too
>> difficult for most volunteers and it could ensure that at least a certain
>> level of competency is attained before being exposed to complex tasks. If
>> people know that in the first place then they can make a choice as to
>> whether they commence or continue to map.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have no idea how this could be accomplished as I know little of the
>> linkages between OSM and the HOT Task Manager, but restricting HOT tasks to
>> those with some defined training could improve the results.
>>
>>
>>
>> Let's say as a minimum you train folks on roads and residential area
>> polygons - that might be level 1 (ID Editor)
>>
>> Level 2 could be after training for buildings, tracks, paths (ID or JOSM)
>>
>> Level 3 for validation (JOSM)
>>
>>
>>
>> In this way HOT tasks simply get assigned at each level and you know you
>> have the right people doing the tasks at hand. The task manager could also
>> only highlight jobs at their assigned level until they do the next level
>> training.
>>
>>
>>
>> You might even consider, as part of validation, dropping people from a
>> higher level to a lower level if they continually fail to produce results
>> at the desired consistency.
>>
>>
>>
>> Just my thoughts as a casual mapper.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers - Phil
>>
>>
>>
>> Thin Green Line Supporter , Volunteer
>> Mapper (GISMO) - Red Cross 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Severin Menard [mailto:severin.men...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 13, 2016 4:34 AM
>> *To:* hot@openstreetmap.org
>> *Subject:* [HOT] OSM humanitarian mapping and its learning curve
>>
>>
>>
>> The edits on hotosm.org job #2228 
>> have started and now happens what I feared. There is no mention of what are
>> the necessary skills and newbies are coming with a lot of enthusiasm but
>> with almost no OSM experience. A quick analysis of the first 29
>> contributors shows that 20 of them have created their OSM account less than
>> one month ago. Some did it yesterday or today. Wow.
>>
>> The result of that : obviously, crappy edits are coming, spoiling what we
>> have been doing over the last few days : now we have building as nodes
>> where shapes are totally visible, un-squared bad shaped buildings and the
>> main landuse area is self-cutting in various places (see there
>> ).
>>
>> Nothing new under the sun : it was already the case for Haiti EarthQuake
>> 2010. Quite a pity that six years after, despite the OSM tools have
>> improved a lot, it remains the same. It is though quite simple to fix the
>> most part of it: do-not-invite-newcomers-to-map-over-complex-crisis-
>> contexts.
>>
>> I guess some will argue that the OSM newcomers are people of good will
>> and that they just want to help and that they my feel offended/discouraged.
>> Of course their intentions are high and yes they may feel a bit hurt. But
>> this is really a classic in humanitarian response: people with the best
>> intentions in the world may not fit for