Humanitarian OSM Team/Meetings/TrainingWG/30 March 2015

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

#hot: Training Working Group Meeting, Monday Mar. 30 2015

Meeting started at 08:02:29 UTC.

Meeting ended at 10:08:29 UTC.

Agenda Document with Additional Notes

People present (lines said)

  • clairedelune (60)
  • althio (45)
  • nick_Tallguy (20)
  • RAytoun (17)
  • mataharimhairi (15)
  • dodobas (5)

Meeting summary

(coming)

Links Used in Meeting


IRC Log

08:02:29 RAytoun: Hello to all no matter where you are ... from a lovely clear sunny morning in the UK after a grey rainy day yesterday.
08:02:55 nick_Tallguy: Morning RAytoun
08:03:16 RAytoun: Hi Nick
08:06:02 althio: Hello/Morning/Afternoon!
08:06:37 clairedelune: Hi, anyone here for the Training WG meeting?
08:06:40 mataharimhairi: Good afternoon from Indonesia!
08:06:56 nick_Tallguy: Hi althio, clairedelune & mataharimhairi
08:07:27 RAytoun: Good morning from sunny UK
08:07:54 clairedelune: Hello everyone!
08:08:07 althio: Hi clairedelune and all
08:09:33 clairedelune: Here is the agenda: https://hackpad.com/Training-WG-Meeting-March-30-2015-SuAg2xvTmdp
08:10:01 mataharimhairi: Thanks Claire
08:10:07 clairedelune: I kept some of the points from last meeting because I couldn't check in advance if there was still anything to say on them
08:10:20 clairedelune: Maybe you can share your inputs if any.
08:10:54 clairedelune: But then we don't have much specific subject for this meeting, so feel free to add your items to the list still
08:14:10 clairedelune: BlakeGirardot__ are you around/available?
08:14:45 mataharimhairi: I just saw on the agenda that you were wondering if there were any Outreachy updates?
08:14:59 mataharimhairi: I'm sure this is more in relation to the LearnOSM projects
08:15:17 clairedelune: Exactly
08:16:01 mataharimhairi: But just to let you all know, we are reviewing applications till the 13th of April, with contributions still being made by the candidates up until the 7th of April
08:16:46 mataharimhairi: So Althio will have a better idea around then, if one of the LearnOSM candidates will be selected for an internship
08:17:18 clairedelune: And are we ok with the feedback we are getting? Or do you think there's anything we could do before the end of the applications of candidates? Enough communication?
08:17:51 mataharimhairi: I also know that Althio has a lot on his plate, so I was wondering if it would be worth asking during this meeting if anyone with LearnOSM experience would like to be a co-mentor?
08:18:23 althio: I will review the applications (especially for LearnOSM project) and discuss with other potential mentors of others projects
08:19:48 mataharimhairi: @althio: Do you need any assistance from someone else in the LearnOSM team, or are you happy to review the applications by yourself?
08:20:26 althio: I could do with: input on your preference/priorities on proposed projects, offers of informal co-mentoring if one LearnOSM project is selected,
08:21:12 nick_Tallguy: I still haven't read the mentor requirements and I'm unreliable because of other commitments, but I will do what I can, when I can
08:21:30 mataharimhairi: I can definitely help with the first
08:21:34 althio: I can review by myself, I will welcome anyone who want to do it as a team
08:22:03 RAytoun: I do not believe I have the technical knowledge at this stage
08:22:28 clairedelune: Great, althio, thank you, feel free to share with the participants of this meetings the items you would like to be working as a team.
08:22:52 clairedelune: By email, when you'll have time
08:23:23 mataharimhairi: Perhaps reviewing the applications yourself first, and then sending round your notes on the candidates with their contributions for the team to look at might work?
08:23:50 mataharimhairi: I would also be happy to go through them after you have initially reviewed them :)
08:24:00 althio: Just let it be known: Even if I am 'main mentor', anyone is welcome to give help and feedback, anytime
08:24:04 althio: good mataharimhairi :)
08:24:30 clairedelune: Perfect then!
08:25:49 clairedelune: Anything else on Outreachy projects?
08:26:40 clairedelune: Otherwise, we can move to the HOT summit activities
08:26:45 mataharimhairi: Not really for now Claire :)
08:26:54 althio: good to proceed
08:28:16 clairedelune: althio again, I think you've been leading quite a lot lately also for the summit, haven't you?
08:28:47 althio: not really leading, just following
08:29:05 clairedelune: ;)
08:29:10 althio: blake is in the organisation team
08:29:29 althio: I will attend thanks to a HOT scholarship
08:29:39 clairedelune: Yes, but he does't seem to be around at the moment
08:29:53 clairedelune: congrats althio, that's very good news!
08:30:05 nick_Tallguy: congratulations althio - good news
08:30:15 althio: i am looking around at proposed talks and workshops + activation curriculum sprint
08:32:21 althio: I will try to follow everything that interest me/LearnOSM but I am not a speaker and organiser
08:33:12 althio: thanks nick_Tallguy & clairedelune feel free to drop me notes if you have something in mind for the Summit but cannot attend
08:33:48 clairedelune: ok good, is there anyone else taking part to the summit or to its organisation?
08:34:43 clairedelune: (so far I was not able to take part in its organisation, and I'm not sure yet if I can find a way to come... :s)
08:35:33 mataharimhairi: I will be attending the summit, as we are conducting the Activation Sprint in the days just before it
08:35:56 mataharimhairi: Is there something you would like assistance with?
08:36:28 mataharimhairi: On the off chance I will be able to help :)
08:37:07 clairedelune: Nothing special at the moment, thank you bt good to know who will attend and might help.
08:37:56 althio: attending: mataharimhairi cristiano + some activators b/c sprint+summit (including BlakeGirardot__ ?)
08:38:40 clairedelune: We'll see via mail with Blake if there are things we should try to focus on before it.
08:39:12 clairedelune: Then I think we can continue with Transifex subject
08:39:48 althio: thanks for the reminder, I followed up this morning ;)
08:40:20 althio: So we met by Skype with Tony, COO from Transifex, Blake and I
08:40:44 clairedelune: Yes, thank you, I wanted to check if everything is public or if we are still waiting for some formal agreement?
08:41:09 althio: Transifex Live looks very promising, we agreed to try it out
08:41:31 althio: They are offering it free of charge
08:41:46 nick_Tallguy: that sounds very interesting
08:42:03 clairedelune: Will it be free of charge for a limited period of time or not specified?
08:42:13 althio: Transifex is OK, LearnOSM (as in Blake and I) is OK
08:42:47 althio: free of charge for not specified / unlimited
08:43:09 althio: because they want to help some organisations at their own discretion
08:43:33 althio: and open-source, non-profit, humanitarian is good in their book
08:44:51 althio: we just need to arrange with dodobas and whoever maintains the current HOT-OSM organisation@Transifex
08:44:58 clairedelune: so now, the next step is to identify the official organisation profile which will get the Live version rights
08:45:16 dodobas: althio: hi
08:45:27 althio: hi dodobas ;)
08:46:37 althio: indeed clairedelune
08:48:48 clairedelune: And once we got the rights for it, how do we want to proceed? Is a workflow already decribed?
08:49:22 clairedelune: Should we make a test on some untranslated sections before deciding if we go for it with the whole website?
08:49:39 clairedelune: That is going to be a huge work
08:49:48 althio: how: maybe with a staging/sandbox project and site
08:50:03 althio: workflow: not described!
08:50:07 nick_Tallguy: have you seen the email from Kate in the last few seconds
08:50:14 clairedelune: not yet
08:50:48 althio: got it
08:51:09 clairedelune: interesting
08:51:41 clairedelune: Who else want to be involved in this process, so we can include him/her in the thread?
08:52:11 clairedelune: I suggest we continue this after checking Kate's points
08:52:19 nick_Tallguy: I would like to join in more when I get more time
08:52:44 RAytoun: I am happy to join in where I can be of help
08:52:53 clairedelune: Do you have any idea when it will happen nick_Tallguy?
08:53:07 nick_Tallguy: Things should improve over the next month
08:53:13 althio: it is certainly a brand new feature, we will see how buggy
08:53:48 clairedelune: Great, anyway Nick is already in the loop and we can add RAytoun into it
08:57:25 clairedelune: I hope we can agree on how to test it before/at our next meeting. Next item?
08:57:36 althio: do you understand the point about printing ?
08:57:53 nick_Tallguy: althio - no?
08:58:33 dodobas: i think... you can't prepare translated PDFs ...
08:59:22 clairedelune: I think it's some kind of dynamic translation, which might not be stored on our website, but I should look closer at how it works...
08:59:32 dodobas: because translations are hosted by TX, they are dinamically pulled fro every request
08:59:38 althio: because the translated strings are not on our side, ready to be processed?
09:00:06 althio: ok dodobas good to know, thanks
09:00:07 dodobas: also... how to translate images ?
09:00:33 dodobas: at the moment, IIRC, every language has it's own image
09:00:46 clairedelune: Can we open another hackpad/Gdoc to list all those items and see how we can test or face them?
09:01:22 althio: well images... that is a hard point but it is in any workflow, not only Transifex
09:02:07 althio: i agree for a new email thread and collaborative doc
09:03:41 clairedelune: ok!
09:04:54 clairedelune: Any news on TeachOSM? (Jorieke is not available today so we may postpone this subject)
09:08:17 nick_Tallguy: At least two of us are on their mailing list
09:11:14 clairedelune: Yep, true, but no specific exchange on how we could collaborate on some projects or improve our websites yet, right?
09:11:32 nick_Tallguy: BlakeGirardot has responded to a message about Moodle, But there has been nothing more that I am aware of
09:12:11 clairedelune: ok, thank you nick
09:13:28 clairedelune: RAytoun, on the level of expertise of validators? I saw it had been added last meeting as an item for next meeting.
09:15:06 RAytoun: Hi, yes...I have come across some tiles that have been validated and checking the validators have found they have only 2 -3 tiles completed over one or two projects.. but they are validating other people's work
09:15:54 RAytoun: I know we encourage validating but we need to have a guideline as to when they are ready to start doing so
09:16:12 RAytoun: Is this possible?
09:17:06 nick_Tallguy: I have contacted mappers who are validating when they don't seem to know what they are doing. As far as I know https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Tasking_Manager/Validating_data is still the only reference
09:18:39 nick_Tallguy: Until the team at https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2 get the chance to implement more of the issues, it is difficult to check on the validators
09:18:58 nick_Tallguy: also - what do we require - a cursory glance or an expert mapper?
09:19:55 nick_Tallguy: For the aid organisations to carry out a ground survey, many of the things we like to see, such as roads joined together, are not actually needed
09:20:31 nick_Tallguy: you could say that the ground survey is a form of validation
09:20:53 RAytoun: I was thinking of setting a start point like .. having completed a certain number of tiles over a number of projects so that they can see if they are 'ready' or not
09:21:40 clairedelune: nick_Tallguy, that might be true for going with field papers but aid orgnisations need more than that. When working for them it is difficult for them to see OSM as a trustable dataset if roads are not properly joined
09:22:15 nick_Tallguy: Personally I would like us to discuss & agree on a standard
09:22:40 clairedelune: so I think we need to keep at least our minimum quality standards regarding data geometry without lowering them
09:24:28 clairedelune: There are several aspects which need to be taken into account whie validating, some are objective ones, and some are subject to some personal interpretation
09:24:32 RAytoun: I am in agreement with Nick about a standard
09:25:29 nick_Tallguy: We need the validators to understand relations so they can correct waterways - islands need to show up for a number of reasons
09:25:34 RAytoun: When validating a HOT activation I use different standards to that of a Missing Maps activation
09:26:20 clairedelune: Objective ones: there shouldn't be objects without tags, roads not joined while they should be and so on.
09:26:32 clairedelune: RAytoun, could you describe the differences?
09:28:25 RAytoun: Often ther is not enough evidence on the imagery to join roads, when validating for a HOT activation I will assess the probability as to whether a road joins or not....the actual alignment is secondary..the importance is to indicate that there is a route through there.
09:29:43 RAytoun: With the Missing Maps which is pre-disaster mapping I am a bit more inclined to go by what we can see and leave the verification of incomplete detail to the ground teams
09:31:28 clairedelune: Ok, I understand better what you meant.
09:33:18 clairedelune: But I think it would be easier to work the same way with all those tasks, having the same standards... What do the others think about this?
09:34:28 RAytoun: I am quite happy if we can come to an agreement on a single set of standards
09:34:40 clairedelune: Do you know if Missing Maps ground teams wouldn't come back the same way for modifications if you had use the "activation validating way"?
09:35:37 clairedelune: I think assessing the probability is the way to go... then of course it can depend a bit on the validator's point of view as well but why not?
09:36:27 nick_Tallguy: In order to validate, you need to be able to map - we have the wiki article on validating, but until the series in LearnOSM is complete concerning mapping remotely, we don't actually have something giving all the required information about how to complete the mapping. Once we have that series complete it become easier to set the standard for validation.
09:36:35 RAytoun: We do get walking papers back from ground teams in Missing Maps projects... the disaster teams do not.. they are involved in dead bodies and rescuing survivors.. not updating maps.
09:38:43 althio: I can dream... I would like instructions (and tracing guides), precise and clear-cut so we are clear what we expect. It should be the Activator/Project creator responsibility to use/create a good set of instructions and requests, adapted to the area and objectives
09:38:52 clairedelune: (GIS officers are not personally rescuing survivors and they update maps, sometimes even OSM even if it doesn't happen often.)
09:40:40 nick_Tallguy: I think it's reached the stage where iD is being promoted, but it is not possible to carry out mapping to the standard we would like to see, using it. If we (& I do) want a higher standard, we either need more from iD, other tools, or more people validating using JOSM
09:41:29 althio: It is hard to get everything right when you create a project, so I think we can help with guidelines and ready-to-paste instructions
09:41:35 RAytoun: althio... that type of information is now starting to appear under the Instructions tab of the Task Manager but still needs some work to get it uniform
09:42:19 clairedelune: Sometimes instructions are quite clear and simple but it doesn't take much for a mapper to alter a relation (not on purpose) and the validator should be able to detect and correct it, which is more complex than the basic project.
09:42:36 althio: i agree RAytoun about uniform/consistency
09:42:50 nick_Tallguy: You can create links from the project in TM2 to LearnOSM - we need links from LearnOSM to the tracing guides, but we need more validators and a method of tracing what they are dong
09:42:52 clairedelune: althio, fully agree with that, isn't it part of the next updates for the TM2?
09:43:12 althio: I agree nick_Tallguy about mapper/iD and validation/JOSM
09:43:59 clairedelune: Are there actually many validators validating using iD? (had never thought about it)
09:44:32 nick_Tallguy: what is validatiing - some have suggested a quick look - in which case iD is suitable (I'm not advocating this)
09:44:36 althio: you cannot know, can you?
09:45:08 althio: validating is a TM action, you don't even need an editor
09:45:43 clairedelune: I could be a good recommendation to suggest that validation should only be done with JOSM, if there are things which cannot be properly checked with iD. (but I'm not of much help on this as I'm using only JOSM basically)
09:46:06 clairedelune: (because of the online/offline aspect°
09:46:11 clairedelune: )
09:46:12 RAytoun: Only if you interrogate their completed tiles to see what editor they are using. If it is iD then they cannot use the automatic validator as with JOSM so basic errors are missed
09:46:24 althio: clairedelune, instructions in TM2... things have been proposed in different forms, I don't think it will be accepted soon and implemented
09:46:38 sanderd17: What if the one responsible forthe project validates the entire region after it's done? With that, I mean checking if the highway classifications match between the different tiles (something you can't see when you validate a single tile), and running the JOSM validator on it
09:46:57 althio: soooo... that is why i advocate for a wiki form: a set of guidelines/instructions, as reference for projects creators
09:47:42 althio: sanderd17, that is already the case, the established workflow
09:48:15 sanderd17: althio, and does it happen?
09:48:17 althio: mapping/tile, validation/tile, validation/full-area
09:48:19 clairedelune: althio, not optimal compared with having it directly into TM2, but I agree with you for the time being
09:48:53 clairedelune: sanderd17, most of the time yes (at least for road classification)
09:49:00 althio: clairedelune: not enough time from TM2 dev? + opposition from members of ActivationWG
09:50:51 althio: not optimal: Some project creators do not like forms and templates and I could not come up with something satisfactory for them
09:51:19 nick_Tallguy: Perhaps we need this working group & the activation working group, to decide a desired standard for a validator
09:51:45 clairedelune: The problem with JOSM validation tool in my opinion is that it will only consider the objects modified during the current session I think, not sure if you can make it check the objects which were not just modified by you?
09:51:59 nick_Tallguy: you can
09:52:32 althio: is that the default behaviour? check all?
09:52:32 nick_Tallguy: load the tile, press validate button - it checks it all
09:53:03 clairedelune: oh ok
09:53:11 clairedelune: good to know, thanks
09:53:32 clairedelune: I mean I should have known this for a while...
09:53:54 clairedelune: another reason to have a well described validation standard
09:53:59 RAytoun: It checks all objects that have nodes within the tile you are validating and if the feature extends outside the tile it also checks anything along it's length
09:55:34 clairedelune: nick_Tallguy I agree with your suggestion to work with the AWG on a common standard for validators
09:56:08 nick_Tallguy: The standard is only any good if we know who has reached it
09:56:27 nick_Tallguy: we all make mistakes and could fail on one occassion
09:57:11 clairedelune: we have a standard, we can prepare a better course for it on Moodle, but that's difficult if we don't agree first on what is the most important
09:57:28 RAytoun: Is there any way of getting a list of people who are validating... we could then send the link to a new set of standards when it is prepared
09:58:17 clairedelune: But of course, we can all fail, but there will be people coming after us and correcting things. Moreover imagery is often outdated and things evolve on the ground, so nothing is ever fixed
09:58:34 nick_Tallguy: clairedelune - I agree
09:59:07 clairedelune: RAytoun, we could maybe ask Pierre or Drazen about it?
09:59:24 nick_Tallguy: Perhaps a hackpad document common to this wg & activation wg in which we discuss the standard desired
09:59:25 clairedelune: At least for them to get a message in their TM mailbox
09:59:38 clairedelune: yes agreed
09:59:51 clairedelune: Who wants to start it?
10:00:19 nick_Tallguy: clairedelune - I can start the hackpad on validating
10:00:30 clairedelune: Wonderful
10:00:44 RAytoun: Liaise with me Nick.. i will give you a hand there
10:00:52 nick_Tallguy: willdo
10:01:33 clairedelune: I suggest all the "being worked on" document to be shared on the Training WG mailing list so that anyone can add his 2 cents
10:01:57 RAytoun: excellent
10:02:51 althio: approved!
10:03:03 clairedelune: And I suggest that we close this meeting... already 2 hours into it! Anyone still want to add a last word?
10:03:38 althio: Thanks folks!
10:03:52 clairedelune: Thank you very much to all!
10:04:30 RAytoun: Thank you clairedelune for a well orchestrated meeting
10:04:44 clairedelune: I don't know yet if I'll still be chairing when we'll meet next time, but you'll get updated of any change anyway
10:05:00 althio: Please welcome a new language on LearnOSM ;)
10:05:03 althio: http://learnosm.org/uk/beginner/
10:05:21 clairedelune: Next meeting is planned for April 13, on the "other" timeslot
10:05:33 clairedelune: Thank you althio!
10:05:34 althio: uk is for ukrainian, not United Kingdom :p
10:05:46 clairedelune: Did we also get the russian one?
10:06:01 nick_Tallguy: althio - well done on facilitating this
10:06:06 althio: all thanks for Andygol he did it all
10:06:24 althio: clairedelune: not related to the 'other' website
10:06:38 althio: just a contributor on his own
10:06:53 althio: so no russian here and now
10:06:53 clairedelune: oh, ok, woaw!
10:07:44 nick_Tallguy: sorry, need to say bye all now
10:07:51 althio: bye
10:07:57 clairedelune: It would be good to send an announcement about it at least on the LearnOSM list
10:08:01 clairedelune: bye all
10:08:29 RAytoun: bye

Retrieved from "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Humanitarian_OSM_Team/Meetings/TrainingWG/30_March_2015&oldid=1587167"