Hi, You state: "and the only way to get rid of them is ConfigureMap>Hide>"POI Icons" which is a shame because you loose all the other useful ones too:"
This is not true. You can create filters on POI groups and inside POI groups. I use those filters as well as some POIs I don't care about at all. There is an issue in the current 3.x versions though (I filed an issue for it and it will be fixed in one of the future versions). If you go to "Configure Map" -> "POI overlay", you can select which POI group you want to see, but you can no longer select your own created filter(s). If you go to "Search"-> "Categories", you can define your own filters. Once created you can use these inside the "Configure Map" -> "POI overlay" Harry Op di 26 nov. 2019 om 02:23 schreef Greg Troxel <[email protected]>: > A Thompson <[email protected]> writes: > > > In some parts of England, at zoom levels >=16, the map is very cluttered > > with symbols for domestic photovoltaic solar panels on house roofs, and > the > > only way to get rid of them is ConfigureMap>Hide>"POI Icons" which is a > > shame because you loose all the other useful ones too: > > > > [image: Screenshot_20191125-233449_OsmAnd+.jpg] > > The maps are getting very large - England alone is 1752 MB (i.e. without > > Wales or Scotland). I wonder if including fewer solar panels would be > > beneficial both to reduce clutter and file size. I can see why the data > in > > OSM could be useful for analysis with GIS tools, but not why solar > panels > > that aren't a major farm should be in OsmAnd's map. > > I suspect that the clutter issue is important and the file size impact > not so much. > > My approach (were I to work on this which I'm not :-) would be to figure > out how to tell ifa given generation:source=solar is important or not, > perhaps by saying nodes are not and the way that big installations are > tagged is, and then to change the rendering config to render them only > when zoomed really far in (i.e., if a house is 200 pixels by 200 pixels, > then the icon is probably ok). This could end up being based on > feature size and declaring that nodes are to be treated as if 5m x 5m. > > > Doing some tests with Overpass Turbo, in England the following are > tagged > > with "generation:source=solar": > > > > 106631 nodes > > > > 13043 ways > > > > 182 relations > > > > If I filter out those also tagged with location=roof or > location=rooftop, I > > get: > > > > 11078 nodes > > > > 8551 ways > > > > 44 relations > > The problem is that being on a roof does not make it minor, and to me > the real goal is to show it when the actual feature is large relative to > the zoom level. > > > Tagging is inconsistent, and I guess that most of these nodes are still > > insignificant panels on rooftops. So my suggestion would be to include > in > > OsmAnd maps only ways and relations not tagged with location=roof or > > location=rooftop, and no solar panel nodes at all. > > > > Thoughts, anyone? > > That is reasonable, as is including the nodes and only showing them at z19 > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Osmand" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/rmir21vv3ap.fsf%40s1.lexort.com. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Osmand" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/CAGARPpufzrpJcnh%2BvwBDmfxH%3DirKUA-eQYEDbMjyNNMFnduNfA%40mail.gmail.com.
