Changeset: 59403025
removed inaccuracy
Closed by FiftyNiner
Tags
changesets_count | 14 |
---|---|
created_by | iD 2.8.2 |
host | https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit |
ideditor:walkthrough_completed | yes |
ideditor:walkthrough_progress | welcome;navigation;point;area;line;building;startEditing |
ideditor:walkthrough_started | yes |
imagery_used | Esri World Imagery |
locale | en-US |
Discussion
-
Comment from Rich1234
Changeset deleted the neighborhood node identifying "Shirlington". Mapper is new, so message sent requesting they undo what appears to be accidental deletion of map data.
-
Comment from FiftyNiner
This is the other edit you pointed out was incorrect. It was not clear to me at all that the point sitting in the middle fo the parking lot labeled Shirlington was a valid point. It seems like such a higher level point should not be visible at such lower levels. But that's probably not something I can have an effect on. It seems to be a bit of a UX issue. I would appreciate if you could use your experience to revert my edits since I have not yet figured out how to do that. I have learned my lesson about making changes.
-
Comment from freebeer
This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 59429254 where the changeset comment is: Trivial revert. Welcome 1959er, what I guess you mean is a UX issue should be the editor-shows-all. I suspect if you view the map with different renderers, it may appear more as you expect.
-
Comment from Rich1234
> It was not clear to me at all that the point sitting in the middle fo the parking lot labeled Shirlington was a valid point.
Welcome to OSM, and this is all part of the learning process.
Yes, it is partly a UX issue. ID (the editor you used) shows everything, and the OSM data model is such that "higher level" material is normally represented by tags attached to the basic elements (nodes, ways, and relations). So for ID, it is always best to check and see what tags are attached to something before deleting it. If it has a bunch of tags attached, that is an indication that it may have some significance.
With JOSM you can filter your view to hide things you don't wish to see at a given time while mapping. ID (as of the last time I used it) does not have this feature. But JOSM has a bit of a steeper learning curve (not too bad, but it is not as trivial to start with as ID).
-
Comment from FiftyNiner
thank you for the feedback. I will look into using JOSM. Are you aware how to get involved in the conversation about improving UX related issues. I am sure it can cause frustrations when newbs come in and try to contribute, and only cause more issues. At least I believe I also made some valid improvements. Again, Thanks for the guidance and fixing my mistake.
-
Comment from Rich1234
Followup to your "It was not clear to me at all that the point sitting in the middle fo the parking lot labeled Shirlington was a valid point." statement.
See this OSM wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dneighbourhood
Note the text under "How to map" - "Node or way". You'll see that a node, centered in the 'neighborhood' is an acceptable way to map the concept. And as these 'neighborhoods' in Arlington do have semi-fluid boundaries (an ancient court case decreed that Arlington would not be further subdivided in any official capacity, so there is no official boundaries for these neighborhoods) the use of a singular node is appropriate.
You'll find more of these nodes around Arlington if you go looking for them.
-
Comment from Rich1234
Re: improving UX issues
No, I'm not sure (not without searching the OSM wiki for details, but I'll leave that to you).
ID is meant to be the easy to get started with editor. JOSM is a bit more to get up to speed on, but it is much more powerful long term.
If you do investigate JOSM, also look at the extensive list of plugins it also has available. The "buildings_tools", "turnlanes-tagging", "turnrestrictions", and "utilsplugin2" are all especially useful to have.
I added a lot of missing building outlines with ID before I switched to JOSM. Two or three buildings drawn with the buildings_tools plugin and I never wanted to add another building using ID ever.
-
Comment from FiftyNiner
Thanks. What threw me was a random point in the middle of the parking lot without a clear indication that it is tied to a larger area. That's one of the UX issues that is probably ripe for improvement at least in the ID application. I'm not sure what the ideal solution would be, but as a beginner, it looked like an erroneous point. I may look into trying to improve the UX issues, as it may help with quality in an exponential manner. I have run into a couple other issues that could definitely benefit from being improved or resolved. Again, thanks for the introduction guidance. I'll be more cautious from now on, for sure.
-
Comment from Rich1234
By all means if you have ideas for improvement, you should suggest them at the github repository that "freebeer" references.
As a new mapper, those UX issues will stick out at you as non-obvious where someone else whom has grown accustomed to the status quo (warts and all) likely no longer notices the prominence of the warts. So a fresh perspective can often be useful input.
In the instance of the "Shirlington" node, in JOSM with its default paint style, the node is rendered as a little icon of an "area" and has "Shirlington" labeling it in bold font. So for JOSM's styling, it is clear that the node is somehow "special" and not just a random forgotten node lying around on the map.
So, if nothing else, at least having ID render this node similar to how JOSM does at present would help to make the "specialness" of the node more recognizable at the outset.
Nodes (1)
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by Fastly, OSMF corporate members, and other partners.
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |