I support such clarification. Has it been discussed with the LCCWG yet ? I like the UK method exposed by SK53.

If the Openstreetmap Foundation Board needs a HR associate and a staff accountant, why would they need to be Board committees instead of simply contractors serving a working group ? Of course, direct executive control lets the board do more and do it faster - but at the cost of wider participation, so it amounts in practice to concentration of power and that comes with risks. While executive power ultimately belongs to the Board, I believe that the Working Groups must keep operational control - even when contractors are involved.

In other words, the OSMF Board believes it needs a HR associate and a staff accountant. That may be. But why would they need to be Board committees instead of simply contractors ?

My apologies for not specifying that CartONG has of course nothing to do with the UNICEF Mali education import.

Do not believe that dirty data once imported will ever be cleaned. The UNICEF Mali education import has school positions all so approximate that all they are useful for is to hint that a school exists in the vicinity of that village - not useless but it is has no place in Openstreetmap. And the names are in fucking uppercase. It has been six years since this horror. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import_MALI_UNICEF_Education

Surtout, la complétude apparente n’implique pas que les données soient correctes… Un œil nouveau est toujours bienvenu pour passer dans le jardin et arracher quelques mauvaises herbes.

Re: implementation, have you looked at Mediawiki’s Article Feedback extension ? Looks like work in progress, but this could eventually fit this requirement. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Article_feedback/Version_5

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/muramototomoya/diary/42305

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ff5722/diary/42211

Indeed mistakes are normal for new users and HOT has no monopoly there (and new users don’t either - experienced users such as me sometimes make mistakes of considerably larger scale). What sets organizations such as HOT apart is that they are skilled at corralling lots of new users into projects to which they claim leadership - which is all a good thing for everyone involved. But I believe that the branding of these new user’s contributions (witness their ubiquitous use of hashtags in changeset comments) means some responsibility upon the leadership who organizes them. That leadership is no hierarchy and the users take no orders… But there is leadership in organization nevertheless and with that comes responsibility for the outcome. In technical terms, it means that I believe the leaders to be ultimately responsible for the quality of their project’s output: they cannot foist that upon the unsuspecting new users who, contrary to them, have no idea about what a sufficient quality assurance process is. The tasking manager has a validation step built upon its process, so all that remains is a will to enforce that step measured using the excellent array of validation tooling such as Osmose or the JOSM validator: enticing new users into contributing and branding their contributions comes with a responsibility to coach them.

I feel your pain man… And then they trumpet : “58736 buildings and 2382399 kilometers of roads added !”. Quality control - what is that ?

Maybe the initiators of Tasking Manager jobs are unwilling to frustrate novice contributors by having them correct their errors. Maybe they do not want to do it themselves… Cleaning up after them is infuriating.

Tu pourrais distinguer les cas d’usage “connecté” vs. “déconnecté” de collecte/édition. Là où la connectivité est abondante et peu coûteuse, j’édite sur place avec Vespucci alors qu’en brousse ce sera plutôt OSMTracker à utiliser dans JOSM à la maison.

Even if only a tiny minority participates in mailing lists or other gregarious electronic exchanges, those who do may be in touch with local groups… That way I met a bunch of stealth contributors in a couple of countries.

Correct the names directly on the signs ! In a couple a places in Sénégal, I have seen locals do that after being fed up with the French-speaking authorities misspelling their locality.

Spotted similar figurines in France too - a different model, but they see to mark crossings near schools.

@Richard And on second thought I’m even more ashamed of the awful generalization about its users… Oh well - everyone have one of my nice kula necklaces !

Love saintam1’s Torvalds quote. Even in Dakar I now see misguided Maps.me POI additions sprouting but I try to engage them pedagogically - those may well be our future heavy contributors… And at least, a badly described POI (with a wrong position because it was recorded where the user was standing instead of where the POI lies…) is less bothering than the Potlach highway spaghetti I’m used to see… But maybe it is just that I’m not seeing many yet.

Hello - qu’est-ce que ça a donné ?

To me, the main difference between paper maps and digital maps is that whereas you can unfold the surface of a paper map in its full square meter glory, you look at digital maps through a straw and you have to rely heavily on the zoom feature - which makes the single-scale of paper maps difficult to port to the new medium

Oops - correct URL for Whodidit: http://zverik.osm.rambler.ru/whodidit/#