Re: [OSM-talk-be] Where to suggest/discuss the renderer?

2018-02-23 Thread Tim Couwelier 
The problem is - whenever you try and get changes for the renderer - the
argument is they don't feel they should change the renderer to try and
influence the tagging. They care about rendering 'the tags that actively
get used'.

Be very carefull how you pitch the argument, or it'll instantly get a big
red 'denied' stamp on it merely based on that argument.

2018-02-23 8:22 GMT+01:00 marc marc :

> Le 23. 02. 18 à 07:44, Karel Adams a écrit :
> > Whence my repeated question: where or with whom can this be discussed?
>
> the tagging mailing for the schema
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> github to use a current schema
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Where to suggest/discuss the renderer?

2018-02-22 Thread marc marc 
Le 23. 02. 18 à 07:44, Karel Adams a écrit :
> Whence my repeated question: where or with whom can this be discussed?

the tagging mailing for the schema
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

github to use a current schema
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Where to suggest/discuss the renderer?

2018-02-22 Thread Karel Adams 

Glenn, hebt ge me wel goed gelezen?

There is not the slightest need to convince me we should not map for the 
renderer. There's a bunch of mappers, especially in France but also one 
in Italy, who vehemently remove the "aeroway=aerodrome" tag from small 
airfields. When I reinstate it, they will promptly remove it and send me 
angry messages.


I do not say they are right, I do say there is some reason to their 
approach. It is not acceptable that the renderer knows only one category 
of aerodrome so that it maps a small recreational aerodrome the same way 
as an international airport. This should be improved in the renderer, 
both to satisfy those Southern grumblers even if they're not right; but 
mainly to improve the map that we produce.


It is not because they are wrong in France that there is no room for 
improving the renderer. Whence my repeated question: where or with whom 
can this be discussed?


KA

PS one thing I have begun to do is to tag those small fields as 
"aeroway=airstrip" but that is not to everybody's liking, either.



On 22/02/18 09:41, Glenn Plas wrote:

Mapping for the renderer is de facto wrong and what you experience now
(in france etc.) is the endresult of that attitude.  I don't understand
why you get discouraged on OSM because of a map you don't like.   It's
like saying:  "I don't contribute to Wikipedia anymore because when I
print a page out, it's not aligned the way I want it."

There are several options for anyone in your situation:

1. make your own map.  There are several sites that allow you to make
custom maps.
2. more technical: copy cartoCSS, change whatever you want, set up a
tile server and enjoy your perfectly suited map
3. try to change the consensus, lobby for universal solution, try to get
the standard cartoCSS changed to your likings (and repeat later when
someone else does the same)
4. Look for existing map alternatives  (different renderings)

You should realise that it has nothing to do with the source data.
There are already ton's of different map rendering out there, perhaps
one will be perfect for you.

Don't stop mapping because of someone elses decision to represent a
feature in a way that doesn't appeal to you.  It's the worst reason to
stop as that might just change in an instant.

Glenn


On 19-01-18 16:43, Karel Adams wrote:

When I first consulted maps - paper-only, at that time, of course -
the famous Michelin 1:20 had distinct symbols for (bigger)
airports, (smaller) airfields, and glider fields. As of 2018, the
generic map of openstreetmap has only a single icon to represent
anything mapped with "aeroway:aerodrome" - and all of them rendered as
from zoomlevel=13 - and none below.

This is really very bad. Why should I want to contribute to a system
that delivers poorer info than paper maps of 50 years old?

Even worse, many active and able mappers are reluctant to update the
database properly because the correct info will be so poorly rendered.
Especially in France and Italy, where I had endless arguments with
people removing the "aeroway=aerodrome" tag from real proper
aerodromes, because they didn't want their local grass runway mapped
the same as CDG Roissy airport. Even if I don't agree, I can fully
understand their point of view!

What is the proper place to question this matter, and discuss schemes
of improvement? Is there a discussion site for the renderer?




___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be






___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Where to suggest/discuss the renderer?

2018-02-22 Thread marc marc 
HEllo,

Since the rendering is aware of the problem and its answer is "there's a 
schema missing able to be used." :
- make a fork of rendering is useless if the data does not exist
- it is enough to make a proposed feature to fill the gap.

Regard,
Marc

Le 22. 02. 18 à 10:41, Glenn Plas a écrit :
> Mapping for the renderer is de facto wrong and what you experience now
> (in france etc.) is the endresult of that attitude.  I don't understand
> why you get discouraged on OSM because of a map you don't like.   It's
> like saying:  "I don't contribute to Wikipedia anymore because when I
> print a page out, it's not aligned the way I want it."
> 
> There are several options for anyone in your situation:
> 
> 1. make your own map.  There are several sites that allow you to make
> custom maps.
> 2. more technical: copy cartoCSS, change whatever you want, set up a
> tile server and enjoy your perfectly suited map
> 3. try to change the consensus, lobby for universal solution, try to get
> the standard cartoCSS changed to your likings (and repeat later when
> someone else does the same)
> 4. Look for existing map alternatives  (different renderings)
> 
> You should realise that it has nothing to do with the source data.
> There are already ton's of different map rendering out there, perhaps
> one will be perfect for you.
> 
> Don't stop mapping because of someone elses decision to represent a
> feature in a way that doesn't appeal to you.  It's the worst reason to
> stop as that might just change in an instant.
> 
> Glenn
> 
> 
> On 19-01-18 16:43, Karel Adams wrote:
>> When I first consulted maps - paper-only, at that time, of course -
>> the famous Michelin 1:20 had distinct symbols for (bigger)
>> airports, (smaller) airfields, and glider fields. As of 2018, the
>> generic map of openstreetmap has only a single icon to represent
>> anything mapped with "aeroway:aerodrome" - and all of them rendered as
>> from zoomlevel=13 - and none below.
>>
>> This is really very bad. Why should I want to contribute to a system
>> that delivers poorer info than paper maps of 50 years old?
>>
>> Even worse, many active and able mappers are reluctant to update the
>> database properly because the correct info will be so poorly rendered.
>> Especially in France and Italy, where I had endless arguments with
>> people removing the "aeroway=aerodrome" tag from real proper
>> aerodromes, because they didn't want their local grass runway mapped
>> the same as CDG Roissy airport. Even if I don't agree, I can fully
>> understand their point of view!
>>
>> What is the proper place to question this matter, and discuss schemes
>> of improvement? Is there a discussion site for the renderer?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> 

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Where to suggest/discuss the renderer?

2018-02-22 Thread Glenn Plas 
Mapping for the renderer is de facto wrong and what you experience now
(in france etc.) is the endresult of that attitude.  I don't understand
why you get discouraged on OSM because of a map you don't like.   It's
like saying:  "I don't contribute to Wikipedia anymore because when I
print a page out, it's not aligned the way I want it."

There are several options for anyone in your situation:

1. make your own map.  There are several sites that allow you to make
custom maps.
2. more technical: copy cartoCSS, change whatever you want, set up a
tile server and enjoy your perfectly suited map
3. try to change the consensus, lobby for universal solution, try to get
the standard cartoCSS changed to your likings (and repeat later when
someone else does the same)
4. Look for existing map alternatives  (different renderings)

You should realise that it has nothing to do with the source data. 
There are already ton's of different map rendering out there, perhaps
one will be perfect for you.

Don't stop mapping because of someone elses decision to represent a
feature in a way that doesn't appeal to you.  It's the worst reason to
stop as that might just change in an instant.

Glenn


On 19-01-18 16:43, Karel Adams wrote:
> When I first consulted maps - paper-only, at that time, of course -
> the famous Michelin 1:20 had distinct symbols for (bigger)
> airports, (smaller) airfields, and glider fields. As of 2018, the
> generic map of openstreetmap has only a single icon to represent
> anything mapped with "aeroway:aerodrome" - and all of them rendered as
> from zoomlevel=13 - and none below.
>
> This is really very bad. Why should I want to contribute to a system
> that delivers poorer info than paper maps of 50 years old?
>
> Even worse, many active and able mappers are reluctant to update the
> database properly because the correct info will be so poorly rendered.
> Especially in France and Italy, where I had endless arguments with
> people removing the "aeroway=aerodrome" tag from real proper
> aerodromes, because they didn't want their local grass runway mapped
> the same as CDG Roissy airport. Even if I don't agree, I can fully
> understand their point of view!
>
> What is the proper place to question this matter, and discuss schemes
> of improvement? Is there a discussion site for the renderer?
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be



___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Where to suggest/discuss the renderer?

2018-01-19 Thread marc marc 
to avoid the egg and chicken problem,
I think it's best to work on both ends.

1) work on a taginfo proposal to distinguish between a large airport and 
a small one. it can be based on the proposal I mentioned earlier. or 
based on some of the existing tags your are talking about. it can also 
go through an intermediate phase that would use aeroway=aerodrome while 
adding info in secondary tags to prepare the change. this usually use 
the wiki like the link I posted and/or is generally discussed on the 
mailing tagging (but don't talk about rendering, they are allergic,
you have to focus on tags).

2) work on a rendering request: a free-to-use icon, a zoom from which it 
should be displayed and criteria. the criteria could initially include a 
list of the different existing cases like :
aeroway=airstrip
aerodrome=airstrip
aerodrome=private OR club OR airstrip OR regional OR airsport
aerodrome:type=private OR club OR airstrip OR regional OR airsport
when ready, it should be put on github

Regards,
Marc

Le 19. 01. 18 à 18:52, Karel Adams a écrit :
> Marc, thanks for the reply. Only the arguments (not yours! I will not 
> shoot at the messenger! at the contrary!) do not hold true. Several 
> hundred minor fields have been tagged with either "aeroway:airstrip" or 
> ("aeroway:aerodrome" AND "aerodrome:airstrip"). The first are not 
> rendered at all, the second are rendered just like CDG Roissy. 
> Ridiculous! And really demotivating for perfectionist mappers.
> 
> I really think it is a kind of chicken/egg problem: renderers will say 
> there is no basis for differentiating as long as no more differentiated 
> info is in the database, and mappers will say it is not worth 
> differentiating the database as long as all aerodromes are mapped the 
> same - or not at all. How to break this vicious circle? Where shall 
> renderers and mappers discuss the classes of aerodromes, and how they 
> are rendered?
> 
> KA
> 
> 
> On 19/01/18 17:37, marc marc wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Le 19. 01. 18 à 16:43, Karel Adams a écrit :
>>> distinct symbols for (bigger) airports,
>>> (smaller) airfields, and glider fields
>> I found this old propal.
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Aerodrome
>> I like importance=international/national/regional like for railway.
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Jgpacker#Proposed_features.2FAerodrome
>>  
>>
>> try to contact other and/or make a request for comment on tagging ml
>>
>>> Is there a discussion site for the renderer?
>> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues
>> but before requesting a render improvement, we need tags in the db :-)
>> also look a previous issues
>> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1143
>> Almost all of the discussion focuses on the fact that information is
>> missing in osm to determine the importance of an airport.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Marc
>> ___
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> 

___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Where to suggest/discuss the renderer?

2018-01-19 Thread Karel Adams 
Marc, thanks for the reply. Only the arguments (not yours! I will not 
shoot at the messenger! at the contrary!) do not hold true. Several 
hundred minor fields have been tagged with either "aeroway:airstrip" or 
("aeroway:aerodrome" AND "aerodrome:airstrip"). The first are not 
rendered at all, the second are rendered just like CDG Roissy. 
Ridiculous! And really demotivating for perfectionist mappers.


I really think it is a kind of chicken/egg problem: renderers will say 
there is no basis for differentiating as long as no more differentiated 
info is in the database, and mappers will say it is not worth 
differentiating the database as long as all aerodromes are mapped the 
same - or not at all. How to break this vicious circle? Where shall 
renderers and mappers discuss the classes of aerodromes, and how they 
are rendered?


KA


On 19/01/18 17:37, marc marc wrote:

Hello,

Le 19. 01. 18 à 16:43, Karel Adams a écrit :

distinct symbols for (bigger) airports,
(smaller) airfields, and glider fields

I found this old propal.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Aerodrome
I like importance=international/national/regional like for railway.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Jgpacker#Proposed_features.2FAerodrome
try to contact other and/or make a request for comment on tagging ml


Is there a discussion site for the renderer?

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues
but before requesting a render improvement, we need tags in the db :-)
also look a previous issues
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1143
Almost all of the discussion focuses on the fact that information is
missing in osm to determine the importance of an airport.

Regards,
Marc
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be



___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Where to suggest/discuss the renderer?

2018-01-19 Thread marc marc 
Hello,

Le 19. 01. 18 à 16:43, Karel Adams a écrit :
> distinct symbols for (bigger) airports, 
> (smaller) airfields, and glider fields

I found this old propal.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Aerodrome
I like importance=international/national/regional like for railway.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Jgpacker#Proposed_features.2FAerodrome
try to contact other and/or make a request for comment on tagging ml

> Is there a discussion site for the renderer?

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues
but before requesting a render improvement, we need tags in the db :-)
also look a previous issues
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1143
Almost all of the discussion focuses on the fact that information is 
missing in osm to determine the importance of an airport.

Regards,
Marc
___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Re: [OSM-talk-be] Where to suggest/discuss the renderer?

2018-01-19 Thread OSMDoudou 
I don't know for sure, but the rendering on openstreetmap.org is called 
OpenStreetMap Carto and to request improvement I think you file a bug report on 
their github. [1] See also [2] and notice the brief "Reporting Issues" guidance 
mentions providing a screenshot and a link. [2]

[1] https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues
[2] 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md

-Original Message-
From: Karel Adams [mailto:fa348...@skynet.be] 
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 16:43
To: OpenStreetMap Belgium 
Subject: [OSM-talk-be] Where to suggest/discuss the renderer?

When I first consulted maps - paper-only, at that time, of course - the famous 
Michelin 1:20 had distinct symbols for (bigger) airports,
(smaller) airfields, and glider fields. As of 2018, the generic map of 
openstreetmap has only a single icon to represent anything mapped with 
"aeroway:aerodrome" - and all of them rendered as from zoomlevel=13 - and none 
below.

This is really very bad. Why should I want to contribute to a system that 
delivers poorer info than paper maps of 50 years old?

Even worse, many active and able mappers are reluctant to update the database 
properly because the correct info will be so poorly rendered. 
Especially in France and Italy, where I had endless arguments with people 
removing the "aeroway=aerodrome" tag from real proper aerodromes, because they 
didn't want their local grass runway mapped the same as CDG Roissy airport. 
Even if I don't agree, I can fully understand their point of view!

What is the proper place to question this matter, and discuss schemes of 
improvement? Is there a discussion site for the renderer?




___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be


___
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be