Humanitarian OSM Team/Meetings/TrainingWG/8 June 2015

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Minutes

The HOT Training WG met beginning at the pre-announced time of 1800 UTC (1400 EDT). The participants were Claire Halleux @clairedelune (HOT Board facilitator), Tom Taylor @TomT5454 (acting and later confirmed Chair), Nick Allen @Nick-Tallguy (co-Chair), Steve Bower @SteveBower, Blake Girardot @BlakeGiradot, Ralph Aytoun @RAytoun, and Alexander Nolting @Alek. No agenda was posted. Tom proposed the following items, which were accepted:

  • Review of previous meeting minutes
  • Progress reports from Steve and Nick
  • Progress report sent by Althio
  • Proposal for project organization

The IRC log of the meeting follows these minutes. After the meeting formally closed, there was lively discussion amongst a few of the participants plus others. The training-related portion of the IRC log for that is attached under the heading "Supplementary Discussion".

The topics are marked with the times (EDT, 12-hour clock) at which they appear in the IRC log.

Minutes of May 25 Meeting (2:10:59 PM)

Tom summarized the May 25 meeting (the minutes of which are now posted). Previous (May 11) action items are closed except relating to Blake's action to write standard where-to-get-help text. (Tom erroneously stated that Heather Leson still had an outstanding action regarding the survey, but that item is closed). Out of the May 25 meeting, Tom and Steve undertook to map existing training materials. That action is ongoing and needs to be extended beyond simple location (see below).

Agreement On Chair and Co-Chair (2:13:53 PM)

The meeting got sidetracked into a discussion of Working Group leadership. It was agreed that Tom Taylor should continue as Chair, with Nick Allen as Co-Chair. Claire Halleux continues as the HOT Board representative and facilitator.

Progress Reports

(2:25:35 PM) Steve has developed a list of training material and documentation for his own benefit. He is prepared to share it at an appropriate point in time. In the meantime, he has been expanding the list of links on the WG top page. Tom raised the question of where we should put documents like this. Github seems to be the most likely place. Steve has also been reviewing OSMAnd documentation.

Nick observed at this point that every page of LearnOSM should have date of last review for accuracy at the bottom. This was generally agreed. Nick also provided the URL of a Github "sandbox" site he had established, allowing people to experiment with Github before moving to production. This is at https://github.com/Nick-Tallguy/Testing_learnosm, and could include experimenting with the translation workflow.

(2:35:20 PM) Tom reported that Suzan Reed was very interested in being part of the WG efforts. Steve undertook an action to get in touch with her and help her get onto IRC.

(2:36:18 PM) Althio provided a report as part of the May 25 meeting agenda [1], and an additional report by E-mail on May 27. That second report is copied below. Althio was unable to attend the June 8 meeting, hence could not give us a further update.

1. Status of material in English

Sections are being added, reorganised and updated, in particular:
-- Note to new volunteers: http://learnosm.org/en/coordination/nepal-disaster/
-- Smartphone app: http://learnosm.org/en/mobile-mapping/osmtracker/
Thank you Nick @Nick-Tallguy for your sustained hard work to improve the materials!

Special thanks to Win @gitGOwin for his various corrections and his full update of:
-- Smartphone app v2: http://learnosm.org/en/mobile-mapping/osmand2/

More thanks to Daniel @CloCkWeRX, Jessica @jmarlena, Brad @neuhausr, Manuel @humitos, Blake @bgirardot for all contributions big and small in our GitHub repository.

I also would like to salute people contributing behind the scenes or participating in discussions to improve form and contents globally: @pyrog for the input, Nick @Nick-Tallguy for the cleanup, Jessica @jmarlena, Alex @lxbarth, Mikel @mikelmaron and members of the HOT Training Working Group.

Take a tour at https://github.com/hotosm/learnosm/issues

2. Improvements in several languages:

-- Spanish: Translation of Coordination by the great team of Jorge @jsanz, Pedro-Juan @vehrka and @shiguera.
-- German: Translation of Detailed Editing and review of Beginner's Guide by Michael @michael63-osm
-- Japanese: Care by Satoshi @nyampire

3. New languages:

-- Ukrainian and Russian Beginner's Guides BOTH by Andrey @Andygol.
-- Norwegian: Work recently started by Anders @andersar.
-- Swahili: Work recently started by Geoffrey @kateregga1.

Thank you to all our translators!

(2:37:15 PM) Nick sent a report to the HOT Training E-mail list pointing to https://github.com/Nick-Tallguy/Nick-Tallguy.github.io/issues/17. The latter provides an extensive description of what he has been doing to tidy up LearnOSM, along with proposals for further reorganization. He asked if his proposals were reasonable and there was agreement that they were. (However, see below regarding creation of a vision of the structure and content of our learning materials as a first step before further reorganization.)


LearnOSM Project Organization

(2:42:08 PM) Tom sent out a proposal to divide the work on LearnOSM into five parts, some of which could be worked in parallel:

  • Take an inventory of existing learning materials. Output would be location, a brief description of content, and an evaluation of the accuracy and relevance of that content.
  • Create a vision of the desired outcome: what content, how organized, in what media?
  • Set priorities for development of new material, updating of existing material, deletion of obsolete material.
  • Execute based on these priorities.
  • Translation.

Interested people would be invited to sign up for each part according to their inclinations and abilities.

Discussion brought out several points, relating both to content and to process. Regarding content:

  • The whole process has to keep in mind that it is for people who are trying to find the instructions they need to understand what they are doing. (Ralph)
  • We have to provide materials for 'local mappers' as well as 'remote mappers', NGO's etc. (Nick)
  • When someone wants to start using OSM, he should be directed to the right materials (remote tracing / local data collection / working with data) (Claire)
  • The front page of LearnOSM needs discussion (Nick)
  • One vision statement might be, "All training material and associate documentation should be accessible without logging in or creating a user" (Steve)
  • I think of OSM as the database, used by many applications (viewers, editors, QGIS, OsmAnd, Osmosis, ...). Not sure where we draw the line. I would add a diagram to the Training Inventory, with OSM at the center, and all the consuming applications around it. Would have helped me get oriented. (Steve)

Regarding process:

  • The WG page will point to a project coordination page, which in turn will point to individual work products of the working teams (e.g., inventory, vision of target output, etc.).
  • The new page that Russell Deffner set up at http://hotosm.org/projects/learnosm will be a natural place to put the vision statement.
  • The creation of the vision of the target outcome has to take priority in our efforts, since it drives everything else that follows.
  • Part of that has to be the setting of the initial scope of the project -- priorities at a strategic level, so to speak. The subsequent priority-setting phase that Tom proposed is then more in the way of a tactical plan.
    • We have to be careful in the scope of what we are taking on, our first priority should be to help new mappers to contribute to HOT activations and in between do Missing Maps projects. (Ralph)
  • The vision is pertinent to the Training WG, but could be reviewed by other WGs.
  • We should have an "Ideas" page separate from the "Current Activities" page.
  • (Brought out in the supplementary discussion (3:41:33 PM)): Problem with training materials development is that it is on "small public" channels only; the target audience can't involve themselves. It is too much one way only (Alek)

In terms of contributions to the work: Ralph and Tom committed to work on inventory. Ralph offered to help with proof reading. Tom offered to help with writing. The preliminary roster of the vision creation work team consists of Steve, Suzan Reed, Nick, Ralph, and our new intern Anwar. (Russell Deffner and Blake Girardot added themselves subsequent to the meeting.) One formal action was agreed:

Action: The vision development working team to come up with a preliminary draft for consideration at the next meeting.

Tom will set up a project coordination page. This may involve moving content from the current WG page.

It was generally agreed that the next scheduled meeting date, 22 June, is acceptable. Claire may or may not be able to make it. However, given the minimal attendance to the May 25 meeting, the timing of the meeting should be reconsidered. (It is currently scheduled for 0800 UTC.) Tom undertook to set up a Doodle poll for meeting time.

The beginnings of an agenda for that meeting have been set up at https://hackpad.com/HOT-Training-WG-Agenda-22-June-2015-4kpuhQcObmn.



IRC Log

(2:05:29 PM) TomT5454: OK, guess we should start, since your time is limited.
(2:07:21 PM) SteveBower: Fire away
(2:07:23 PM) TomT5454: I have as possible agenda items the account of the last meeting (which I have to condense into official minutes), Steve and Nick report on progress, Althio's report on progress, my E-mail proposal for project organization. Comments?
(2:07:53 PM) SteveBower: that works
(2:10:59 PM) TomT5454: OK, summary of last meeting: Steve and I met in the small hours of our mornings. We reviewed the actions out of the previous meeting. My and Ralph's contributions will be attached to the minutes when I draft them. Open items were the terms of reference for the survey (Heather) and the introductory page text (Blake).
(2:12:06 PM) clairedelune [~oftc-webi@247.145-242-81.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] entered the room.
(2:12:10 PM) TomT5454: New ongoing action, Steve and I, work on mapping out what we have now.
(2:12:37 PM) TomT5454: Hi, Claire. Do you want to run the meeting?
(2:13:20 PM) clairedelune: Hi Tom, Please go on, I'm going to catch up and still need to put a child in bed at some point
(2:13:42 PM) TomT5454: OK
(2:13:48 PM) clairedelune: Thanks
(2:13:53 PM) SteveBower: Could you (Tom, Claire) clarify for me: does the workgroup have a permanent "chair"? Tom, you're interim or filling in - is that right?
(2:14:43 PM) clairedelune: Steve, I've been the Board representative in the Training WG. Blake helped me chairing for a while.
(2:14:49 PM) TomT5454: Thanks. I wanted to ask Claire what the Board was doing about that. AFAIK they will be installing a member as Chair or co-Chair. I'm not a member.
(2:15:05 PM) BlakeGirardot: I don't think we are going to do board chair's anymore.
(2:15:34 PM) BlakeGirardot: So like a board liason, but wg should primarily be run by the community as much as possible I think was the feeling.
(2:15:51 PM) TomT5454: I think Russell's proposal pointed to the broader membership
(2:16:02 PM) clairedelune: Anyway, during the last year the objective was to have one board member and one other (not on the board) to lead and chair the meetings
(2:17:07 PM) clairedelune: Blake, is there been a discussion on the subject, or just your feeling?
(2:17:20 PM) SteveBower: ok - sounds like WG "chairs" are in transition. Thanks. Still working out how agendas are set, tracking current activities, etc.
(2:17:51 PM) BlakeGirardot: There has been discussion.
(2:17:56 PM) BlakeGirardot: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1EorbpNCZ03R3NsWjk1alh6Y0k/view
(2:19:04 PM) clairedelune: Thank you Blake, yes the board member was a facilitator.
(2:19:28 PM) BlakeGirardot: So the minutes are not exactly clear, but it looks like the WG's need to select and chair (lead) and co-chiar (co-lead)
(2:19:40 PM) clairedelune: However as the training WG had been relaunched there was no other lead to start with
(2:19:49 PM) BlakeGirardot: and there will be a board person who is liason or facilitator
(2:20:06 PM) SteveBower: ok, good to know
(2:20:45 PM) TomT5454: OK, I'm a volunteer, but quite willing to step aside if someone feels better qualified.
(2:21:22 PM) clairedelune: Tom that's great if you would be willing to continue
(2:21:47 PM) SteveBower: I agree. I'm surely not better qualified (new to the group and OSM) but available to help with organizational tasks.
(2:21:47 PM) Nick-Tallguy: I'm principally LearnOSM, but there is more to training than LearnOSM - would be happy to see others investigate other develpments and we integrate as needed
(2:22:12 PM) TomT5454: I've run a lot of meetings (Internet protocol standards development), but have variable energy and time.
(2:22:26 PM) RAytoun: I also agree. Tom, you have been doing fine so far
(2:22:48 PM) clairedelune: That's ok, if we can find a co-lead, that would be easier to share the work when not available
(2:23:41 PM) Nick-Tallguy: I can co-lead if needed
(2:24:16 PM) clairedelune: Great Nick! And if needed I can still help sometimes as well
(2:24:43 PM) Nick-Tallguy: that would be good - I'm often absent for a couple of weeks
(2:24:46 PM) TomT5454: Probably a good idea. You have all the technical knowledge. I've programmed, but not gotten into the underfootings of OSM
(2:25:35 PM) TomT5454: OK, Steve, do you want to talk about what you've done?
(2:25:49 PM) SteveBower: Shall I add the chair/co-chair/claire backup to the OSM Training WG Wiki?
(2:26:14 PM) TomT5454: Fine with me.
(2:26:16 PM) SteveBower: Sure - I'm very interested to see a compilation of training materials, and related "documentation" materials (OSM Wiki pages, etc.)
(2:26:20 PM) SteveBower: (will do)
(2:26:36 PM) SteveBower: And better integration with documentation materials, referenced from training materials
(2:27:08 PM) SteveBower: I distinguish between pure training material and documentation, but it's often a fuzzy distinction
(2:28:02 PM) SteveBower: I've been compiling a list of existing training & doc'tion material for my own benefit, but in hopes it will be of use for a broader "portal" of training material
(2:28:23 PM) SteveBower: So at some pt I could share that - google doc, whatevah
(2:28:55 PM) SteveBower: I've also been reviewing the OsmAnd documentation in some detail, as I've needed to learn that app
(2:28:55 PM) TomT5454: We need to sort out where we put what.
(2:29:14 PM) Nick-Tallguy: Something I would be keen to see would be something indicating the last time something was checked for accuracy
(2:29:34 PM) SteveBower: I've been learning how to contribute on GitHub, will be getting into that process
(2:29:55 PM) clairedelune: Nick, agreed.
(2:30:03 PM) SteveBower: Agree on accuracy. I updated the HOT Trnng WG page this AM with LearnOSM modules, and added "as of June 2015"
(2:30:19 PM) BlakeGirardot: Nick-Tallguy: Yes, we need something like that. Even if it is just a reminder in a calendar app every 1 year or something to review
(2:30:20 PM) SteveBower: That might be good practice in general
(2:31:21 PM) Nick-Tallguy: https://github.com/Nick-Tallguy/Testing_learnosm is a small repository that does nothing except give someone the chance to try out pull, push, branch etc - nothing to break if anyone wants tomake use of it
(2:31:48 PM) SteveBower: Thanks Nick
(2:32:18 PM) TomT5454: OK. I've done pushes and pulls, but for the latter I've just manual;ly merged the text, which seems error-prone.
(2:32:32 PM) TomT5454: Have to learn if there is an automated process
(2:33:10 PM) SteveBower: One thing I'm not clear on is the translation process - is it OK to just update the English version, then some downstream process takes care of translation propagation? I guess that's later on the agenda.
(2:33:15 PM) Nick-Tallguy: I've set the staging site up so it can be used to try out - if changes are needed they can be applied before psuhing tothe full site
(2:33:22 PM) SteveBower: Nice
(2:33:35 PM) starcoder left the room (quit: ).
(2:33:46 PM) SteveBower: Done with my update
(2:33:53 PM) TomT5454: Thanks.
(2:35:20 PM) TomT5454: Suzan Reed is very interested in presentation. She sent me an E-mail with an example of her work. I'll get her permission to forward it, perhaps, but definitely she needs to be included in our ongoing efforts.
(2:36:18 PM) SteveBower: I could touch base with her, see if she wants to join, check on IRC on Mac status - if no one else is doing so
(2:36:18 PM) TomT5454: Althio provided information on what he has been doing about translation. I'll incorporate it into the minutes.
(2:36:41 PM) TomT5454: Thanks, Steve
(2:37:07 PM) SteveBower: OK, will do
(2:37:15 PM) TomT5454: Nick, I guess you also reported. Want to elaborate?
(2:37:46 PM) Nick-Tallguy: I would just like to make sure that my proposals are acceptable for changing the layout of LearnOSM
(2:38:10 PM) SteveBower: All proposals looked good to me - and thx for all the work on that!
(2:38:25 PM) TomT5454: OK, thaat's going to be a team effort -- you, Steve, Suzan, Ralph?
(2:39:09 PM) RAytoun: I do not object to being on board with that
(2:39:18 PM) Nick-Tallguy: Not sure on anyone else's progress on updating github - we also have Anwar who is trying to learn the system
(2:39:30 PM) TomT5454: Maybe this brings us to my proposal for breakdown of the work.
(2:39:51 PM) TomT5454: Oops, forgot him. Would be nice to get him into these meetings.
(2:40:18 PM) Nick-Tallguy: He's still trying to get to grips with IRC
(2:41:21 PM) SteveBower: Nick, I'll work through "contributing to learnOSM.md", etc., and will let you know when I think any new process documentation would help
(2:42:08 PM) TomT5454: OK, I sent a E-mail out yesterday breaking the work into five parts: inventory, creation of a vision, setting of priorities, execution, and translation. Some of these (particularly the first two) can be done in parallel.
(2:42:17 PM) TomT5454: Does this sound right?
(2:42:54 PM) SteveBower: Tom: yes, looks good. Need to coordinate with the intern (is that Anwar? I forget)
(2:43:04 PM) Nick-Tallguy: Once we know the process, translation can be in parallel to.
(2:43:50 PM) TomT5454: My idea was that individuals would sign on to particular parts according to their particular ablities and inclinations
(2:44:23 PM) Nick-Tallguy: intern is Anwar
(2:44:32 PM) TomT5454: I myself would leave the vision part to the specialists among you, but I can write
(2:44:54 PM) RAytoun: I am still not comfortable with Github but certainly can help with proof reading
(2:45:14 PM) clairedelune: Sometimes it's good to divide and share the work using Trello (if some of you know it)
(2:45:37 PM) Nick-Tallguy: help with proof reading is brilliant - I sometimes see what I want to see, instead of what's actually there
(2:45:57 PM) clairedelune: But is there are not many different tasks, it can be easier to just keep our current communication channels
(2:45:59 PM) SteveBower: I think it's helpful to have new folks involved in the vision - like Anwar's work. The vision needs to work for those using the material.
(2:47:38 PM) RAytoun: The whole process has to keep in mind that it is for people who are trying to find the instructions they need to understand what they are doing.
(2:48:04 PM) TomT5454: Probably a good idea to sort out what should go where. Why use a different vehicle for the agenda than for the meeting agenda than for the minutes, for instance?
(2:48:25 PM) Nick-Tallguy: Alobear in mind we have to provide materials for 'local mappers' as well as 'remote mappers', NGO's etc..
(2:49:03 PM) clairedelune: Regarding the vision (sorry if this has already been discussed) but when someone wants to start using OSM, he should be directed to the right materials (remote tracing / local data collection / working with data)
(2:49:30 PM) TomT5454: This is substantial, and perhaps should be deferred to the working team discussions
(2:49:36 PM) Nick-Tallguy: The front page of LearnOSM needs discussion
(2:49:49 PM) TomT5454: We need to organize ourselves first so we can coordinate
(2:49:50 PM) clairedelune: I would like to join that part of the discussion.
(2:50:11 PM) RAytoun: That first page needs presentation, it is the first thing they see.
(2:50:21 PM) SteveBower: I think the vision is pertinent to training WG, but could be reviewed by other WGs
(2:50:35 PM) SteveBower: One vision statement might be, "all training material and associate documentation should be accessible without logging in or creating a user" - as some have suggested
(2:51:00 PM) Nick-Tallguy: I agree - but I thought it was?
(2:52:37 PM) TomT5454: Can we think about how we're going to record our work?
(2:53:10 PM) SteveBower: Some training material is in GitHub - not training development, but actual training/documentation.
(2:53:20 PM) SteveBower: Yes, how we'll record the work
(2:54:12 PM) SteveBower: I could take a stab at the Inventory, building on Training WG page - though Anwar's doing that. Maybe feed material to him?
(2:54:19 PM) TomT5454: My basic idea was one project page that would point to everything else we generated. Russell's new page might be it, or the existing WG page
(2:54:40 PM) SteveBower: Which is Russel's new page -
the HOT page? Link?
(2:55:41 PM) SteveBower: [I need a 3rd monitor  ;-)] (2:55:50 PM) TomT5454: http://hotosm.org/projects/learnosm
(2:56:33 PM) TomT5454: The problem is -- he did too slick a job. My Wiki work is fairly elementary.
(2:56:47 PM) SteveBower: Yes, that new page should fit with the Vision. I like the idea of the Training WG Vision statement - high priority.
(2:56:50 PM) SteveBower: IMHO
(2:56:53 PM) dchiles left the room (quit: Read error: Connection reset by peer).
(2:57:06 PM) SteveBower: I think they serve different purposes
(2:57:44 PM) TomT5454: One question: Ralph proposed that LearnOSM be a one-stop shop for everyone. Does this define the scope of LearnOSM to include materials such as the Mapgive videos?
(2:57:47 PM) SteveBower: The training material inventory should be a separate new page, I think - not part of another page
(2:58:27 PM) TomT5454: OK, I think that makes the WG page the coordinating page.
(2:58:49 PM) chebizarro left the room (quit: Ping timeout: 480 seconds).
(2:58:59 PM) SteveBower: I think the WG page should be focused on the WG. The Inventory should be just the Inventory.
(2:59:28 PM) SteveBower: Scope of learnOSM should be part of the vision statement
(2:59:50 PM) skorasaurus left the room (quit: Ping timeout: 480 seconds).
(3:00:10 PM) TomT5454: OK, so the WG page points to the LearnOSM page, which points to the work products of the project.
(3:00:44 PM) SteveBower: I think of OSM as the database, used by many applications (viewers, editors, QGIS, OsmAnd, Osmosis, ...). Not sure where we draw the line.
(3:01:26 PM) SteveBower: I would add a diagram to the Training Inventory, with OSM at the center, and all the consuming applications around it - just a thought, I could sketch it out. Would have helped me get oriented.
(3:02:48 PM) TomT5454: How do we record ideas like this: on an ideas page associated with the project?
(3:02:56 PM) SteveBower: Good discussion. The more we discuss, the more I think we should prioritize the vision statement for the WG. That drives the rest of the organizational pieces.
(3:03:45 PM) RAytoun: I think we have to be careful in the scope of what we are taking on, our first priority should be to help new mappers to contribute to HOT activations and in between do Missing Maps projects
(3:04:42 PM) Nick-Tallguy: Guys, sorry got to go. will read the minutes / log tomorrow - have a good meeting
(3:04:45 PM) sanderd17 left the room (quit: Ping timeout: 480 seconds).
(3:04:54 PM) TomT5454: Thanks, Nick.
(3:05:16 PM) TomT5454: Good point, Ralph
(3:05:34 PM) Nick-Tallguy left the room (quit: Quit: Leaving).
(3:05:59 PM) TomT5454: Setting priorities is my proposed Part C
(3:06:23 PM) SteveBower: I like the idea of a WG "activities and ideas" document - that everyone could contribute to, maybe google docs
(3:06:49 PM) TomT5454: Does it make sense to separate the architectural description of what we want to do (part B) from the setting of priorities?
(3:07:51 PM) Alek: why 3rd party tools, when there is a osm wiki
(3:08:04 PM) TomT5454: That's my question too
(3:08:53 PM) TomT5454: I'd like to consolidate as much as possible -- otherwise I'm spending all my time learning new tools
(3:08:55 PM) RAytoun: I think the setting of priorities should be before or part of the creation of the vision as the priorities is the direction we need to concentrate on
(3:09:35 PM) RAytoun: Which will then help to form the vision.
(3:10:39 PM) TomT5454: Maybe it's a two-stage thing -- strategic and tactical, so to speak
(3:12:02 PM) SteveBower: I thought of the vision as what the end product would be (content, tools/format, etc.), then prioritization as the way to get there
(3:12:03 PM) Alek: so you want a small public -- as part of tactical --
(3:12:40 PM) TomT5454: Could I propose an action for the next meeting, the timing of which we need to agree upon, that the vision team provide a preliminary statement of priority and organization of content within that constraint?
(3:13:14 PM) SteveBower: works for me
(3:13:56 PM) TomT5454: I'll sign up for work on inventorying in the meantime.
(3:14:32 PM) RAytoun: Good move, if we want to achieve and move forward we have to set tasks for completion prior to each meet up.
(3:14:43 PM) TomT5454: I'll set up a Doodle poll for meeting timing, as Althio proposed last meeting.
(3:15:42 PM) TomT5454: I'll also start to work on the project coordination page. This may involve moving some stuff from the WG page.
(3:15:57 PM) TomT5454: Is that OK?
(3:16:40 PM) RAytoun: Is ther any way I could help on the inventory?
(3:17:05 PM) TomT5454: Sure. We'll have to figure out how to divide the work
(3:17:38 PM) SteveBower: If the project coord page is separate, just link from the WG Wiki page
(3:17:54 PM) TomT5454: OK
(3:18:42 PM) SteveBower: For project coord, I suggest separating "Current activities" from "Ideas (parking lot issues)"
(3:19:03 PM) TomT5454: Yes
(3:20:11 PM) TomT5454: Will the date Monday June 22 work for the next meeting, so we just have to agree on the time?
(3:20:45 PM) SteveBower: June 22 good for me, any time
(3:21:12 PM) RAytoun: I can manage the 22nd
(3:21:47 PM) clairedelune: I'll probably be doing field mapping on that day, but will try to join if I can get connected on time
(3:22:33 PM) TomT5454: Anything else we should discuss now?
(3:23:30 PM) TomT5454: OK, meeting adjourned. Thanks everyone
(3:23:39 PM) SteveBower: Thanks, till next
(3:24:20 PM) RAytoun: Thanks to Tom and Nick for taking on the chair and co-chair roles



IRC Log of Supplementary Discussion

(Some administrative stuff omitted)

(3:38:04 PM) Alek: as you can see: the HOT communication channels are widely distributed on IRC, mailing list... lot of subscription only channels
...
(3:41:33 PM) Alek: problem with training materials development is that it is on "small public" channels only; the target audience cant involve themselves
(3:42:26 PM) Alek: it is too much one way only
(3:42:38 PM) Plesioth [~Bonzaii@tor-exit2-readme.puckey.org] entered the room.
(3:42:53 PM) TomT5454: Raw discussion couldn't go to OSM Talk, simply because there would be too high a volume. Maybe summaries from time to time?
(3:43:31 PM) TomT5454: Invite comments
(3:44:27 PM) RAytoun: There is now a link at the bottom of LearnOSM material asking for feedback regarding content.
(3:44:31 PM) Alek: osm talk isnt the target audience... they are already osm editors
(3:44:53 PM) TomT5454: The HOT list?
(3:45:11 PM) pierzen: Hi all, I am happy to see TomT5454 leading the WG. About the vision, important to think about integrating the new contributors from all Th Access doors to HOT Projects. Nepal Activation, mostly the first 2 weeks, more then 3,000 new contributors, coming for only 1-2 days. This bring questions, Material adapted to them, divided by simple tasks like building or road tracing.
(3:45:22 PM) pierzen: The same with the Task Manager and Editors. How to adapt to this?
(3:47:41 PM) Alek: yes, i agree.... direct from access portal to learnosm
(3:47:52 PM) TomT5454: The experts can comment on this, but it looks like you need very basic modules for them, then a separate bunch of more advanced material.
(3:48:18 PM) Alek: experts dont have the questions new audience has
(3:48:56 PM) Alek: that is called the experts dilemma
(3:49:21 PM) RAytoun: Tom you have just struck gold there, they only want bite size chunks that get them mapping, later on they will start asking more detailed questions
(3:50:43 PM) pierzen: For me, this is not only the questions but also the actions taken by new contributors not understanding the OSM mapping basic, the diversity of them, some going to the Task Manager, Validating, invalidating., etc
(3:51:09 PM) TomT5454: Alek, maybe the answer is a very simple form for submitting a question placed on the right page
(3:51:24 PM) RAytoun: I believe that a lot of mappers came in, tried to do some mapping and left again without finding the guides they needed when working with iD and the Task Manager
(3:52:00 PM) pierzen: Yes, guiding can come both from the Learning material and the various menus on HOT sites.
(3:52:55 PM) TomT5454: I'm thinking that providing answers is more complicated, but at least we would have the questions
(3:53:05 PM) pierzen: We had discussions on better guiding from the Task Manager. It is not enough to write in red, This job is reserved to experienced mappers., Or add long instructions.
(3:53:14 PM) RAytoun: I still believe we will retain a lot more mappers if we can imbed the links to initial training aids from the instructions for individual features in the Tasking Manager
(3:53:16 PM) Alek: the disappearance of new mappers were the "experts only" tasks, something like we dont want you here stuff
(3:54:15 PM) pierzen: The Vision should be more then the learning material,but how we address this New Mapper Initiation phase.
(3:54:48 PM) RAytoun: I am in agreement there
(3:54:51 PM) Alek: guide the new mappers to easy tasks
(3:55:20 PM) Alek: the tasks were to complicated, too much in too few tasks
(3:55:21 PM) RAytoun: With easy basic instuctions

(Remaining discussion, though lively, dealt with matters not related to Training)