Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Andy Townsend]

On 25/04/2017 13:51, Greg Troxel wrote:


However, if one renders and one doesn't, in the default style, that's a
bug, and presumably someone can make a pull request to fix it - it seems
obviously uncontroversial.


You'd have thought so, but a project maintainer closed exactly that 
issue at https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/181 
back in 2014.  Unfortunately it's not the only example where the 
"standard" map takes "unusual" rendering decisions.  Put bluntly, if it 
doesn't work for you, use a different map.  Personally, I gave up using 
it about 3 years ago because it was no longer fit for purpose, at least 
for me.


Best Regards,

Andy



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Greg Troxel]

Oleksiy Muzalyev  writes:

> Both "man_made=tower;tower:type=communications" and "man_made=mast"
> are being used interchangeably. One of them is rendered with a good
> icon and another not rendered at all on the OSM map.
> I was not suggesting to re-tag this particular communication mast per
> se, but to attract an attention to this phenomenon.

In general, it seems that tower is for a larger structure that is more
lattice-like and mast for a structure that is more of a pole.   I am not
sure this distinction makes sense, but I am also not sure it's harmufl.

However, if one renders and one doesn't, in the default style, that's a
bug, and presumably someone can make a pull request to fix it - it seems
obviously uncontroversial.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

Both "man_made=tower;tower:type=communications" and "man_made=mast" are 
being used interchangeably. One of them is rendered with a good icon and 
another not rendered at all on the OSM map.
I was not suggesting to re-tag this particular communication mast per 
se, but to attract an attention to this phenomenon.


Best regards,
Oleksiy

On 23.04.17 11:41, Andy Townsend wrote:

On 22/04/2017 07:33, Oleksiy Muzalyev wrote:


It is possible to map it as: "man_made=mast", "height=190", etc., 
then it will be rendered.


In the general case, please don't suggest that people mistag things 
just so that one particular renderer (one that probably isn't used by 
the majority of people that consume OSM data*) renders it.


However in this particular case I can't claim to be familiar enough 
with it to say whether 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dtower or 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dmast is more 
appropropriate, or indeed whether those wiki pages reflect OSM usage.


Best Regards,

Andy

* I'm guessing the "most views" accolade goes to either Mapbox Streets 
or MAPS.ME these days.


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




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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

All what is written at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Aviation is 
fair enough, especially the main principle: "We map anything that is 
observable on the ground.", but not an airspace. A communication tower, 
or a mast is well observable on the ground.


The DJI changed the map on its RPAS control stations from Google to Here 
Map. And on Here Map not much is shown. So usually one looks at several 
maps while planning a flight, especially in an urban area.


Best regards,
Oleksiy

On 23.04.17 10:47, Andreas Vilén wrote:

Please read http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Aviation

Pilots do not use the osm base map...

/Andreas

Skickat från min iPhone

23 apr. 2017 kl. 07:50 skrev Oleksiy Muzalyev 
>:



On 22.04.17 21:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone

On 22. Apr 2017, at 08:33, Oleksiy Muzalyev 
> 
wrote:


In my opinion, it is a significant issue, in fact a disaster 
waiting to happen. There will be soon air-born taxi in Dubai, 
Singapore, etc., and the extremely high communication towers, the 
so-called aviation traffic obstacles 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_traffic_obstacle , are not 
rendered on the OSM map at all.


which disaster do you expect to happen? Someone flying around in 
dense fog and using no other information than osm-carto?


I agree it is a shortcoming that towers are not rendered on 
osm-carto, but we should keep calm and not exaggerate its significance.


cheers,
Martin


Dear Martin,

An air traffic obstacle, a tall structure which can endanger air 
traffic, has to be marked with red and white colored markings and 
with aircraft warning lights at night. If you look at these 
communication towers this is how they are actually painted.


An airman say a pilot of a medicopter may well study terrain 
carefully on a map before a flight. In fact it is not a flight as a 
bird flies, but rather a jump as there is a time limit, an endurance. 
That is why a planning is necessary.


Unfortunately on the OSM map he/she will not see any icon. At the 
same time the air-traffic in urban areas will continue to increase. 
It is future of urban mobility [1].


If a helicopter, an RPAS, a plane touches a mast or a cable it would 
crash; a mast may collapse. For individuals involved it could 
certainly be a disaster.


People do realize it. Andy not only mapped the communication tower 
(or mast) but plans to map its cables. It is a good idea too. It will 
take time to map all these towers (masts), measure and calculate 
their height, etc.


Unfortunately the confusion between "man_made=tower" and 
"man_made=mast" continues. One is rendered and one is not, and that 
adds to confusion.


[1] 
http://www.airbusgroup.com/int/en/news-media/corporate-magazine/Forum-88/My-Kind-Of-Flyover.html


With best regards,

Oleksiy


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



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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Andy Townsend]

On 22/04/2017 07:33, Oleksiy Muzalyev wrote:


It is possible to map it as: "man_made=mast", "height=190", etc., then 
it will be rendered.


In the general case, please don't suggest that people mistag things just 
so that one particular renderer (one that probably isn't used by the 
majority of people that consume OSM data*) renders it.


However in this particular case I can't claim to be familiar enough with 
it to say whether 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dtower or 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dmast is more 
appropropriate, or indeed whether those wiki pages reflect OSM usage.


Best Regards,

Andy

* I'm guessing the "most views" accolade goes to either Mapbox Streets 
or MAPS.ME these days.


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Andreas Vilén]

Please read http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Aviation

Pilots do not use the osm base map...

/Andreas

Skickat från min iPhone

> 23 apr. 2017 kl. 07:50 skrev Oleksiy Muzalyev :
> 
>> On 22.04.17 21:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> 
>> sent from a phone
>> 
>>> On 22. Apr 2017, at 08:33, Oleksiy Muzalyev  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> In my opinion, it is a significant issue, in fact a disaster waiting to 
>>> happen. There will be soon air-born taxi in Dubai, Singapore, etc., and the 
>>> extremely high communication towers, the so-called aviation traffic 
>>> obstacles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_traffic_obstacle , are not 
>>> rendered on the OSM map at all.
>> 
>> which disaster do you expect to happen? Someone flying around in dense fog 
>> and using no other information than osm-carto?
>> 
>> I agree it is a shortcoming that towers are not rendered on osm-carto, but 
>> we should keep calm and not exaggerate its significance.
>> 
>> cheers,
>> Martin
> 
> Dear Martin,
> 
> An air traffic obstacle, a tall structure which can endanger air traffic, has 
> to be marked with red and white colored markings and with aircraft warning 
> lights at night. If you look at these communication towers this is how they 
> are actually painted.
> 
> An airman say a pilot of a medicopter may well study terrain carefully on a 
> map before a flight. In fact it is not a flight as a bird flies, but rather a 
> jump as there is a time limit, an endurance. That is why a planning is 
> necessary.
> 
> Unfortunately on the OSM map he/she will not see any icon. At the same time 
> the air-traffic in urban areas will continue to increase. It is future of 
> urban mobility [1].
> 
> If a helicopter, an RPAS, a plane touches a mast or a cable it would crash; a 
> mast may collapse. For individuals involved it could certainly be a disaster.
> 
> People do realize it. Andy not only mapped the communication tower (or mast) 
> but plans to map its cables. It is a good idea too. It will take time to map 
> all these towers (masts), measure and calculate their height, etc.
> 
> Unfortunately the confusion between "man_made=tower" and "man_made=mast" 
> continues. One is rendered and one is not, and that adds to confusion.
> 
> [1] 
> http://www.airbusgroup.com/int/en/news-media/corporate-magazine/Forum-88/My-Kind-Of-Flyover.html
> 
> With best regards,
> 
> Oleksiy
> 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

On 22.04.17 21:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone


On 22. Apr 2017, at 08:33, Oleksiy Muzalyev  wrote:

In my opinion, it is a significant issue, in fact a disaster waiting to happen. 
There will be soon air-born taxi in Dubai, Singapore, etc., and the extremely 
high communication towers, the so-called aviation traffic obstacles 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_traffic_obstacle , are not rendered on the 
OSM map at all.


which disaster do you expect to happen? Someone flying around in dense fog and 
using no other information than osm-carto?

I agree it is a shortcoming that towers are not rendered on osm-carto, but we 
should keep calm and not exaggerate its significance.

cheers,
Martin


Dear Martin,

An air traffic obstacle, a tall structure which can endanger air 
traffic, has to be marked with red and white colored markings and with 
aircraft warning lights at night. If you look at these communication 
towers this is how they are actually painted.


An airman say a pilot of a medicopter may well study terrain carefully 
on a map before a flight. In fact it is not a flight as a bird flies, 
but rather a jump as there is a time limit, an endurance. That is why a 
planning is necessary.


Unfortunately on the OSM map he/she will not see any icon. At the same 
time the air-traffic in urban areas will continue to increase. It is 
future of urban mobility [1].


If a helicopter, an RPAS, a plane touches a mast or a cable it would 
crash; a mast may collapse. For individuals involved it could certainly 
be a disaster.


People do realize it. Andy not only mapped the communication tower (or 
mast) but plans to map its cables. It is a good idea too. It will take 
time to map all these towers (masts), measure and calculate their 
height, etc.


Unfortunately the confusion between "man_made=tower" and "man_made=mast" 
continues. One is rendered and one is not, and that adds to confusion.


[1] 
http://www.airbusgroup.com/int/en/news-media/corporate-magazine/Forum-88/My-Kind-Of-Flyover.html


With best regards,

Oleksiy


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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Andy Mabbett]

On 22 April 2017 at 07:33, Oleksiy Muzalyev  wrote:

> It is possible to map it as: "man_made=mast", "height=190", etc., then it
> will be rendered.

I have now changed the objects to use this method. (As noted
previously, I have no height data for the Portuguese mast)

> One could also add a "wikidata" tag

For Sutton Coldfield, that tag is on the while station, not just the mast.

What about tagging the anchor points and cables, as mentioned in my
original post?




-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 22. Apr 2017, at 08:33, Oleksiy Muzalyev  
> wrote:
> 
> In my opinion, it is a significant issue, in fact a disaster waiting to 
> happen. There will be soon air-born taxi in Dubai, Singapore, etc., and the 
> extremely high communication towers, the so-called aviation traffic obstacles 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_traffic_obstacle , are not rendered on the 
> OSM map at all.


which disaster do you expect to happen? Someone flying around in dense fog and 
using no other information than osm-carto?

I agree it is a shortcoming that towers are not rendered on osm-carto, but we 
should keep calm and not exaggerate its significance.

cheers,
Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Oleksiy Muzalyev]

On 22.04.17 00:56, Andy Mabbett wrote:

the Sutton Coldfield (England) TV mast:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sutton_Coldfield_transmitting_station

at:


http://www.opensntreetmap.org/?mlat=37.08321=-8.13643#map=17/37.0832/-8.1364

is a significant landmark, visible for several miles, and illuminated
at night. Yet it does not render. Is it missing a tag, or do we need
to tweak the rendering rules?

I became aware of this today, when I added a similar mast, at
Vilamoura (Portugal):


http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=37.0830=-8.1364#map=17/37.0830/-8.1364

For that, I included three support wires, and three anchor points -
how should those be tagged?


Dear Andy,

It is possible to map it as: "man_made=mast", "height=190", etc., then 
it will be rendered. See an example:


https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/409948785#map=17/46.45003/30.74254

A "mast" is in the JOSM list for "man_made" already.

The issue that "man_made=tower" is not rendered on the OSM map had been 
raised already on the mailing lists. In my opinion, it is a significant 
issue, in fact a disaster waiting to happen. There will be soon air-born 
taxi in Dubai, Singapore, etc., and the extremely high communication 
towers, the so-called aviation traffic obstacles 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_traffic_obstacle , are not rendered on 
the OSM map at all.


On other maps say Maps.me map "man_made"=tower is rendered all right.

One could also add a "wikidata" tag to a mast or a tower. Almost all of 
these high structures have got a Wikipedia article.


Best regards,

Oleksiy




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

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 22. Apr 2017, at 01:37, Andy Townsend  wrote:
> 
> The current tagging (man_made=tower; tower:type=communication) looks OK to me.


The word "communication" to me means a two-way exchange of information/ideas 
(mutual, e.g. a phone call). For television, the word "broadcast" would seem 
more appropriate.


cheers,
Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Tagging and rendering of television masts

[Andy Townsend]

On 21/04/2017 22:56, Andy Mabbett wrote:

the Sutton Coldfield (England) TV mast:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sutton_Coldfield_transmitting_station

at:


http://www.opensntreetmap.org/?mlat=37.08321=-8.13643#map=17/37.0832/-8.1364


That's the one in Portugal, I think?

Sutton Coldfield is at:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6044107

The discussion about how to render things like this in the standard 
style is at 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/339 (and 
probably other places).


The current tagging (man_made=tower; tower:type=communication) looks OK 
to me.  An alternative might be to do as per Lichfield 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1258302194 
(man_made=communications_tower), which the "standard" style also doesn't 
render.


I currently show them as e.g. 
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=18=52.600125=-1.833634 
(with a name as well).  One thing that I had given a bit of thought to 
was to have _very_ tall towers appear at lower zoom levels.  It'd 
involve doing a bit of maths in the lua tag transform script, which is 
surely possible, but not something that I've not looked at at all - and 
for Sutton Coldfield it'd need the height tagging as well.


Best Regards,

Andy


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