Summary

  • Before Notes launched in 2013, OpenStreetMap’s engineering group chose free-text reports and deferred redesigning an inconspicuous entry link.
  • The April announcement invited reports without an account, with volunteers checking and editing the map. Several readers then reported difficulty finding the button.

On 11 February 2013, people working on OpenStreetMap spent roughly half an hour discussing how to explain a box for reporting map problems. Where should the pin go? Who would read the message? How could the wording encourage useful detail?

A map of the world had reached the copy-editing stage.

The engineering working group’s minutes preserve the conversation from the introduction of the wording question at 18:45 to agreement at 19:17. The eventual sentence explained that other mappers would see the information and use it to improve the map. Visitors were asked to position the marker accurately and describe the problem clearly. A tiny text box was acquiring a job description.

Easy for whom?

The effort followed a larger argument. In a November 2012 development-list message, one participant argued that the scarce resource was the people fixing reports. He wanted more required information and stronger protection against low-effort submissions. His concern was the work awaiting the person who opened the inbox.

At the February meeting, participants weighed that burden against obstacles for newcomers. They chose free text for the initial release, with another look after launch. The group also agreed that anonymous users should not be able to close notes. Reporting a problem and declaring the note finished were receiving different rules.

Then came the location of the invitation itself. The add-note link sat at the bottom right, and the group knew it lacked prominence. They discussed moving it, but agreed to leave the interface for the moment and reconsider after deployment. Waiting for a wider redesign could hold up the feature. They had a way to invite the public and a rather quiet place to put the invitation.

Please bring enough detail

The wording discussion made the division of work explicit. A reader needed to understand that the note was public, that it concerned improving the map and that someone else would interpret it. Accuracy of location mattered alongside a useful description. A pin was a beginning; another person still had to work out what to do there.

The 29 April 2013 announcement described the resulting offer. Visitors could suggest a renamed business, a missing path or a changed road layout without learning an editor. Notes used ordinary text. Creating one or commenting required no account; registered participants could track their contributions and receive email when a note’s status changed.

Local mappers could check the information and update the map. The announcement acknowledged the earlier OpenStreetBugs service; bringing the facility onto the main site put that reporting route before the map’s own readers.

A suggestion box needs to be found

One commenter under the announcement said they had not yet found time to learn editing but already knew several map problems. That was precisely the sort of contribution the new route could accommodate.

Other comments returned to the smaller problem the meeting had deferred. On 30 April and 1 May, readers described difficulty spotting the entry. One suggested placing it beside the editing control. The invitation to help had arrived; some invitees were looking for the door.

Notes let local knowledge enter through a sentence and a pin. Behind them stood people choosing the reporting rules, revising the instructions, reading the message and checking the place. Making a contribution easy began with the visitor. Finishing it involved a few more desks.