Consistency in terminology: tasks, tiles and squares

[logrady]

I'm not sure if this fits here but it is something that impacts use of the TM. There are a number of different terms in use with respect to the parts of a project: tile, square and task. I think I've seen them used interchangeably.

I believe a project is defined as mapping initiative related to a certain geographical area bounded by coordinates and identified in the TM with a four digit number. Projects have managers who are responsible for activating and overseeing its completion.

The project is divided into smaller, more manageable tasks/tiles/squares (??) that are mapped by volunteers, marked as done when complete and then validated by someone who has not contributed to the map (note: when a validator fixes or adds an edit they then become a contributor).

My issue is with the seemingly interchangeable use of task, tile and square. Have they been formally defined? Would doing so aid in the instructions, training and ultimately the mapping process?

[ethan-nelson]

At least from the perspective of the code base,

Project: a mapping initiative defined by some geographic area that is divided into manageable pieces. Task: a single piece of the project that can be locked, unlocked, marked done, validated, invalidated, or split into smaller tasks.

In most instances, project managers choose to divide the project using a square gridding, so I think people call them squares due to their shape or tiles (probably deriving from the 'tiles' generated for a raster web map).

[RAytoun]

That is interesting Ethan. This was discussed a while back and the hierarchy was explained as.... Project..... The overall umbrella activation or humanitarian intervention such as “Haiti Earthquake” or “Missing Maps Malawi” Task......... The individual 4-digit numbered areas that are all a part of this Project Tile........... The numbered squares within a task that can be mapped and marked complete or split to make the area more manageable. So the idea was.... you could type in the project or activation name in the search box and all the Tasks in that project would come up and you would tackle each Task tile by tile. But as we all can see that is not the way the Tasking Manager is worded. Ethan’s explanation clears up the discrepancy in terminology and makes sense of the terminology used in the Tasking Manager which only has a two tier hierarchy. http://tasks.hotosm.org/project/2382#task/4

From: Ethan Nelson Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2016 4:01 AM To: hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2 Subject: Re: [hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2] Consistency in terminology: tasks, tiles and squares (#912)

At least from the perspective of the code base,

Project: a mapping initiative defined by some geographic area that is divided into manageable pieces. Task: a single piece of the project that can be locked, unlocked, marked done, validated, invalidated, or split into smaller tasks.

In most instances, project managers choose to divide the project using a square gridding, so I think people call them squares due to their shape or tiles (probably deriving from the 'tiles' generated for a raster web map).

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[aawiseman]

I also think how @RAytoun sees it. I usually call the tiles "squares" to be more clear.

[logrady]

So now all we have to is go through all the training documentation and make sure the terminology is consistent ;)

[ethan-nelson]

@RAytoun so okay it looks like based on your explanation people sometimes substitute project in for what is probably instead more like activation or the like. In the next version of the TM, we will have another wrinkle through what is shaping up to be labels. So projects will be able to clustered by a similar component (e.g. ebola, roads, missing maps, earthquake X, etc.) and so the label would hopefully be based on that activation.

While the activation name fits for disaster mapping, it unfortunately doesn't mesh as well with things like groups of Missing Maps projects--so perhaps we can think of a new term to describe the cluster of projects aiming towards a goal or coordinated together.

[logrady]

@ethan-nelson @RAytoun Not sure if this works as an overall term that Ethan is describing but what about "Initiative"?

[RAytoun]

Activation ... Project ... both words are already in use in this context and aptly describe the activity, clearly indicating the difference between a disaster crisis and a humanitarian intervention. I am comfortable with both but am open to any change that may be implemented. The Title on the opening window of the Tasking Manager is "Projects" this could be "Activations/Projects" but I think this needs input from the Activation Working Group as to what they are comfortable with. The Tasking Manager still works perfectly as is and we will just have to make sure we are referring to the various components by their correct names as it appears on the Tasking Manager. As @logrady mentions we should also check the training material to make sure it complies with the current terminology on the Tasking Manager. @ethan-nelson If changes are made to the Tasking Manager please let us know so we can then adjust the training material accordingly and inform as many people as we can of the correct terminology. I will check through the training material and videos over the next few days to see what they have and bring it in line with the two tier structure at present on the Tasking Manager so there is no confusion.

[RAytoun]

So far training material in LearnOSM and also videos seem to fit the Tasking Manager structure. The term "project" for the heading #**** and the term "task square" or "square" for the squares on the grid.

[althio]

For reference, my take on this was here: https://github.com/hotosm/osm-tasking-manager2/issues/477

[logrady]

@althio Thanks Benoît. I think it might be a good idea to refer to a task as a tile as the word task has other connotations, as in "I completed all my tasks for work yesterday" or "My homework task is to finish the readings".

I believe tile would be more precise in that it's not very interchangeable with these types of other contexts.

@pgiraud provides an explanation on use of these terms in #316.

[bgirardot]

This issue is difficult for a number of reasons.

In my experience the most often confused terms are 'task' and 'project'. People often refer to a 'project' as a 'task' as in "I was working on task #2235 etc".

Part of this comes from the name of the software 'Tasking Manager' I think.

There is another level of grouping coming, one above the current 'project' level, letting folks group projects together, which we have not supported in the software itself. I am not sure how much of an impact that is really going to have, except from a project management stand point. It might be more important than I think because we just have not had the opportunity to speak about anything in that one level up larger sense and as soon as we do have that option, it will get referred to a lot more.

This is something like either an activation "Hurricane Matthew" or some other larger project group, e.g., "MapLesotho", "MSF South Kivu", etc.

'Activation' does not seem like a good word for that level of project grouping, as it means something specific to HOT and most TM Projects are not part of activations.

In the non-online mapping world, specifically the project management world, a group of projects is called a 'Program' which does not seem like a great answer here. They also group 'Programs' in to 'Portfolios' maybe that is something to think about.

On the other end of the spectrum, I have always felt 'task' was a good term for the individual units. 'tile' is less of a good term for the individual units because in online mapping 'tile' has a specific definition related to map display. Although as althio points out, it would make sense for other reasons if not for the existing definition of a tile in online mapping.

I think the main issue we need to focus on for consistency for the short/medium time frame is 'project' and 'task', they are and will continue to be the main objects mappers are interacting with, while at the same time thinking of what we might call a group of projects.

I wonder if something crazy like changing the name of 'Tasking Manager' would help with this issue. 'Mapping Manager', 'OSM Mapping Coordination Tool'

Or maybe, aside from getting our documentation more consistent, this is not really an issue at all? Does it cause problems if people are using the wrong terms?

[bgirardot]

For another take on exactly this issue, look at GeoQ: https://github.com/ngageoint/geoq just scroll down to see how they are organizing the 3 levels in their software.

[pgiraud]

Terminology in mapcraft is interesting too.