The document discusses spatial data quality and neogeography. It notes that the world of spatial data is exploding in popularity due to increased accessibility and availability of tools for collecting, analyzing, and presenting spatial data. However, this growth could influence the quality of spatial data. It focuses on the role of neogeographers as data collectors and the implications for data quality. Neogeographers contribute user-generated content, which provides benefits like many eyes finding errors, but also has criticisms like a lack of quality control.

2. Before We Start I am not here to persuade you about the usefulness or limitations of Neogeography or User Generated Content I am here to share my views on issues relating to the topic of spatial data quality and neogeography Disclaimer - In general, my observations derive from my familiarity with mapping, navigation and local search

3. My Background PhD in Geography, specializing in Cartography Attended AutoCarto 1 in 1974 (and gave the keynote in 2008) Associate Professor of mapping and geography at SUNY Albany (1972–1985) Associate at Spad Systems Chief Cartographer, Chief Technologist and VP of BizDev for Rand McNally (1986-1999) CTO and EVP of Engineering for go2 Systems (YP over cell phones) Now run a consulting business focused on geospatial, especially local search, mapping and navigation applications

4. Data Quality and Neogeography Dr. Mike Dobson President TeleMapics LLC [email_address]

5. Spatial Data Quality? Overall concern regarding the “fitness” of data for a particular use Accuracy of position resolution Accuracy of Attribution Logical Consistency Completeness Including spatial coverage Temporal relevance Metadata

6. Spatial Data’s Emerging Popularity World of spatial data is exploding Accessibility to spatial data increasing Availability of spatial data increasing Today’s online environment provides Easy-to-use tools for collecting spatial data Easy-to-use tools for analyzing spatial data Easy-to-use tools for presenting spatial data

7. Why Is This of Concern? The quality of spatial data mitigates the success of communicating spatial concepts Could this explosive growth have an influence on the quality of spatial data?

8. Why Data Quality Is Key

9. No Integrity!

10. Neogeography Neogeography “new” geography using non-traditional tools Neogeographers Want to communicate/share their interests in geography and are willing to do something about it

11. NeoGeos What Roles do Neogeographers play in the process of communicating spatial data? Data collectors – database creators Data analyzers Data Presenters While all three roles impact or are influenced by “data quality”, today I will focus on neogeographers and data collection /database creation

12. Spatial Data Quality and Neogeography In order to help you understand my persuasion on data quality and neogeography, I would like to explore User Generated Content UGC is one of the primary means that neogeographers use to express their interest in Geography On this journey we will loop outside of geography and then fall back in through mapping and other uses of spatial data.

13. U ser G enerated C ontent? Content that is produced by users of web sites and digital media Contrasted with traditional media producers such as broadcasters, production companies publishing companies and map database companies

14. So What’s Important About UGC? Equality of opportunity to publish Coupled with one of the most significant demographic trends in the last century: “ It’s about me” (e.g. use of YouTube, MySpace, Facebook ) “ Especially in respect to the streets, roads and trails I travel, as well as the POIs I frequent and the spatial topics of interest to me ”

15. Social Networking

16. How Did This Happen? Technology that allows you to be “connected”, as well as to communicate and collaborate on your own terms Internet Cellular telephony Development of comprehensive spatial databases Pushing geospatial into the mainstream -Neogeography

17. How Did This Happen? Networks provide for Collective intelligence – the hive mentality or perhaps the Borg Aggregated knowledge from decentralized sources (Wikipedia – Wikinomics) Low cost collaboration

18. UGC Potential Benefits Linus’s law With enough eyes all bugs ( spatial errors ) become trivial Contributors exhibit Self selection Focus Self benefit Numerousness There should be more interested spatial data contributors than professional map editors Spatial distribution The distribution of UGCers is more ubiquitous than that of professional map editors.

19. Criticisms Of UGC Some error situations are too complex to be understood real-time Usability may be low May require extensive error checking User priorities may lead to unreliability Prejudice in responses

20. Lake What Road?

21. Not enough Contributors -Data Points?

22. User Priorities - Oooops

23. Prejudice in Response?

24. Prejudice in Response

25. UGC And Spatial Databases

26. Spatial Database Creation

27. What’s Being Optimized In The Previous Process? spatial data quality Accuracy of position resolution Accuracy of Attribution Logical Consistency Completeness Including spatial coverage Temporal relevance Metadata

28. How Optimized? Data Quality is an integral part of the process Initially Data collected according to specifications Bad data re-collected or placed in the update queue Ongoing Every year significant spatial changes are accommodated. Areas of high change are identified and updated. Other changes are found by systematically working research teams through the entire coverage over time The overall assignment is designed to maximize the time value of money, while increasing the integrity of the database.

29. Harmonization It is this attempt to actively harmonize all data that distinguishes database building efforts. Important Issues Who directs crowdsourced data from an editorial perspective? Who sets standards for crowdsourced data? Who Quality Controls crowdsourced data? What external guidance exists in crowdsourced systems ?

30. Three Categories of Spatial Data Controlled data OS, Navteq, TeleAtlas, INFOusa Hybrid (a mix of controlled and uncontrolled data) Google, Yahoo, MSN, TomTom Crowdsourced (uncontrolled) OSM, Flickr, etc

31. Issue It is possible to manage controlled data quality to meet specific requirements It is possible to manage hybrid data quality to meet specific requirements But can you manage crowdsourced data quality to meet specific requirements on a reliable basis? Let’s look at database compilation for some insights

32. Compilation Commercial Training in compilation Specialization Staff size limited Research limited Sweat of the brow But salaried sweat of the brow Wiki Self Selection Local experience Staff size potentially unlimited Research hours potentially unlimited Avocation

33. Compare and Contrast Commercial What are my coverage goals? What are my accuracy goals? How Much can I spend on updating? What size of capable staff can I afford? How well can I pay them? How can I otherwise incent them to create the best database possible? WIKI How many people will contribute? How many are capable? Where are they located? Does this match areas of weak coverage? How long will it take to get good results over large coverages? How to motivate these collaborators over long periods?

34. What Are The Potential Weaknesses of WIKI? Common issues Not enough data gatherers to validate the data or a method to redeploy them Not enough coverage to meet the need (the distribution of the UGCers) Or a method to redeploy them Lack of Standards Lack of Quality Control But all of these limitation can be accommodated

35. Getting Around Some UGC Issues

36. Are Other Types of Spatial Databases Superior? Even with the benefits of Moolah ($) -Major navigation databases are Out of date Inaccurate Non-comprehensive Variable quality Too expensive to maintain Navteq database extension and update costs in 2007 were over $300,000,000

37. www.refnum.com/osm/gmaps/ Haywards Heath

38. And That’s Why UGC and Neogeographers Will become an integral part of building spatial databases Hybrid data collection systems using UCG and controlled data are where geospatial is going Let’s look

39. Old Information Sharing

40. New Information Sharing

41. What’s The New Process

42. Social Networking Tools Of Interest in Compilation

43. Spatial Data Collection Some UGC will be active User connects to an app and enters relevant spatial data for updating or extending a spatial database Some UGC will be passive Device tracks and reports (anonymously) user paths, builds database by merging path information over time Passive is particularly useful in building navigation databases

44. Relative Cost

45. Relative Accuracy

46. Summing UP Data Collection Systems Closed – commercial compilation efforts, no UGC Open – WIKI approaches, no proprietary data Hybrid – where geospatial is going Advantages spatial data accuracy by contributing the best of both approaches.

47. Raises These Questions Will the winners be Established commercial companies that capitalize on UGC to augment their data? New competitors that commercialize UGC and augment these data to compete with established commercial systems?

48. PND Data Flow – A Winner

49. UGC Open Street Data Flow – No Medal

50. Commercializing UGC

51. Relative Benefits Of Types Of UGC By Device

52. Why We Need UGC and Neogeographers

53. Thanks