Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 23/08/15 00:12, Frederik Ramm wrote: Only a lack of people willing to do the work. A lack of people willing to do the work *and* host the style. We'll happily include them if they meet the criteria you mention, but we're not currently set up to serve multiple styles ourselves. We might be able to switch to vector tiles somewhere down the line, allowing us to serve more styles easily, but that requires a lot of people willing to do a lot of work ;) I can't believe that I am the only person who is stuck in a sort of no-mans land in relation to OSM. Time is a commodity that is in short supply for many of us, so ideally we want to make the best use of it. What I would prefer to be spending time on IS adding data and while I've a growing backlog of material which I should like to add, much of that relates to historic development of the current data, so CURRENTLY I do not have a crib sheet to follow to add material which substantially relates to current object, but includes elements which may come under the classification 'abandoned railways'. The sections of railway information are only a part of the historic element and includes other objects which are currently being adapted or replaced, and I currently don't see ANY point in migrating random pieces of history to OHM, when the bulk of the context is still on OSM. I can be confident that the material is buried in the change log, but that does not make it usable for rendering, and THAT is the problem here. Just as people can omit 'abandoned railway' tag from their own rendering, 'old road or old building' should also be selectable ... and in my book, all that is missing currently is correct rending of 'start_date' and 'end_date' in conjunction with the historic material such as 'abandoned railway'. Yes I know that end_date is a crude structure as is start_date, but currently they are all that exists to provide a chronology of when objects appeared on the map and in what form. That a base map would only contain object with a current valid start_date and end_date allows new development to be mapped but not yet displayed, and the evolution to that new development still to be maintained in the database. This is more about CURRENT history than adding past events but a solution should cover both. Up until now while the differences between the rendering in various tools was irritating, it was reasonably manageable. I don't see that the current planned change will be reflected in all the tools quickly? And more of a problem, if some tools follow 'old' practices then things will be even more confusing for newcomers? Now I am TRYING to get my head around all of the extra stuff I need to provide a private rendering system and I've just had to do a hard reboot of the server as it froze trying to render a sample picture of where I've got to, so I need something a bit more stable before I can use it in the open. Even with an 8 core processor and 32Gb ram it's struggling with a small extract, but then the UK slice does have a larger volume of data for the area? http://lsces.co.uk/storage/attachments/71/2071/osm-lsces-z11.png should explain partially where I've got to. Shields on the road numbers seem to be inconsistent. Need a few less on some roads, and actually include some on others. The other problem is as you should be able to see the main traffic routs are on secondary roads (yellow here), but a number of key roads are actually tertiary or unclassified and I think I need to actually re-tag them so that the gaps in the routing grid are properly represented. Of cause the hill structure would go to explain a few gaps in that grid ... I'm trying to get self sufficient, but that is simply not an easy job with so many different tools used in the background! -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
I agree that blue is the logical color for mapping waterways, and should be reserved for that purpose. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. -- Martin Luther King, Jr. On August 22, 2015 5:11:10 AM Daniel Koć daniel@koć.pl wrote: W dniu 22.08.2015 1:47, Richard Mann napisał(a): I'd be tempted to leave motorways as blue - it's not such a critical problem as the invisible green trunk roads. Adding one For me the problem is the same - blue looks like a river and I don't know why at least some of UK-ers likes to see the London area roads like this (I mean: having to spot two most important road types!): http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=9/51.3289/-0.0673 Its not that UK style doesn't work for the rest of the world, it also doesn't work for UK on OSM, because we have much more data visible than other maps. That's not against this or any other local styling - I never underestimate the power of old habits and I'd like the people to have what they want on the output, no matter why they want it, but it's just not going to happen as long as default style has a mission to be universal. -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ 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] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 2015-08-21 03:13, Colin Smale wrote: While we are at it, what about specific symbols for train/metro stations per operator? That is also a great landmark for map users. I'd love to see that in the Transportation map. The difference with highway shields is that the Standard style is already badging highways, but in a format that seems foreign to people in the U.S. -- m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
W dniu 22.08.2015 1:47, Richard Mann napisał(a): I'd be tempted to leave motorways as blue - it's not such a critical problem as the invisible green trunk roads. Adding one For me the problem is the same - blue looks like a river and I don't know why at least some of UK-ers likes to see the London area roads like this (I mean: having to spot two most important road types!): http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=9/51.3289/-0.0673 Its not that UK style doesn't work for the rest of the world, it also doesn't work for UK on OSM, because we have much more data visible than other maps. That's not against this or any other local styling - I never underestimate the power of old habits and I'd like the people to have what they want on the output, no matter why they want it, but it's just not going to happen as long as default style has a mission to be universal. -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
Purple motorways would be a problem in the Severn Estuary: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=11/51.5850/-2.6402 On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Daniel Koć daniel@koć.pl wrote: W dniu 22.08.2015 1:47, Richard Mann napisał(a): I'd be tempted to leave motorways as blue - it's not such a critical problem as the invisible green trunk roads. Adding one For me the problem is the same - blue looks like a river and I don't know why at least some of UK-ers likes to see the London area roads like this (I mean: having to spot two most important road types!): http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=9/51.3289/-0.0673 Its not that UK style doesn't work for the rest of the world, it also doesn't work for UK on OSM, because we have much more data visible than other maps. That's not against this or any other local styling - I never underestimate the power of old habits and I'd like the people to have what they want on the output, no matter why they want it, but it's just not going to happen as long as default style has a mission to be universal. -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ 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] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 20/08/15 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote: The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours upwards so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white. Just thought I'd highlight the sort of WTF problems that will need to be addressed if the main style sheet does change ... http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Pease_Pottage_Interchange YES the green on the map is a problem, ...it should be the same colour as on the left then it will stand out, and the blue and red should also be darker which I'm currently tinkering with on my own server. The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK web services, and any change needs to be managed in such a manor that those services are not too badly affected. We do not have a list of every site actually using OSM over google, and the vast majority of users will not be following this list, so some other notification process needs adopting ... and an alternative source needs to be in place for those users ... I've finally got a caching setup working, but it's still not ideal. I'm still missing something on getting a clean rendering stack that can also allow additional rendering options to be developed. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
W dniu 22.08.2015 12:14, Richard Mann napisał(a): Purple motorways would be a problem in the Severn Estuary: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=11/51.5850/-2.6402 [3] Sure, but we have more space for changing the boundaries - for example use more dashed lines or make them thinner on lower zoom levels. Here you can see the same place with a border styling which would be different enough: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/51.5964/-2.6682 -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 22/08/15 11:10, Daniel Koć wrote: I'd be tempted to leave motorways as blue - it's not such a critical problem as the invisible green trunk roads. Adding one For me the problem is the same - blue looks like a river and I don't know why at least some of UK-ers likes to see the London area roads like this (I mean: having to spot two most important road types!): http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=9/51.3289/-0.0673 Its not that UK style doesn't work for the rest of the world, it also doesn't work for UK on OSM, because we have much more data visible than other maps. The switch to more pastel colours WAS the problem here, but the blue of the motorway still stands out clearly against the water courses. The only current problem is actually the B roads being lost against the 'farmland' but that is simple to fix - just switch off 'farmland' since the vast majority of areas not identified are farmland anyway. The loss of visibility of these in preference to the miss coloured yellow unclassified roads is the current problem on UK views. That's not against this or any other local styling - I never underestimate the power of old habits and I'd like the people to have what they want on the output, no matter why they want it, but it's just not going to happen as long as default style has a mission to be universal. That more styles are required is a simple fact. The problem is allowing access to an appropriate style rather than the current single option provided by the main page. We need to be able to select style AND language defaults in much the same way that projects like php provide multiple mirrors with local translations and information. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
W dniu 22.08.2015 12:23, Lester Caine napisał(a): The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK web services, and any change needs to be managed in such a manor that those services are not too badly affected. We do not have a list of every site actually using OSM over google, and the vast majority of users will not be following this list, so some other notification process needs adopting ... and an alternative source needs to be in place for those users ... If we take a look from 10,000 feet, this is just a specific manifestation of a more general problem: up to this moment OSM is developing mostly by adding elements (more users, more data, more tags, more visual features, wider ecosystem etc.) and has no procedures for dealing with more systematic changes. It's the same when debating any tagging shift or introducing new tagging scheme - there are no established channels of communication with the whole ecosystem, nor even inside the project! In my opinion this lack of tools for managing any bigger changes (which in turn might be also lack of leadership, I guess) is the main factor behind the project being so constricted: it travels very fast, but only in one direction, because any try of steering shows so many hidden strings attached, that it causes a lot of friction and looks like mission impossible. -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
W dniu 22.08.2015 12:34, Lester Caine napisał(a): the motorway still stands out clearly against the water courses. The So we just disagree here: for me it's just barely spottable, which is far from clear difference, as you see it. That more styles are required is a simple fact. The problem is allowing access to an appropriate style rather than the current single option provided by the main page. We need to be able to select style AND language defaults in much the same way that projects like php provide multiple mirrors with local translations and information. I guess this might be primary a problem of limited resources. Could anybody with technical background in the inner OSM workings tell us what is holding us back with introducing new styles (be it raster styles, additional/interactive layers or even vector tiles)? -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On the topic of whether we can or should notify everyone who may potentially be affected by this change so their opinions can be registered, you may enjoy this read: http://www.ftrain.com/wwic.html On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 8:12 AM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote: On 20.08.2015 10:09, Christoph Hormann wrote If you think a different styling than what is currently proposed would be better it would be best to show it. It's hardly fair to expect critics of the suggested new style to easily come up with alternatives. For one, the effort in question was enabled by sponsorship by Google, and took place over several months. This is not easily duplicated by those favouring other ideas. But more importantly, it discounts all those voices who favour the status quo. Personally, I think that the problems with the current style are relatively minor, and don't automatically justify a drastic change. ___ 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] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 2015년 08월 22일 19:23, Lester Caine wrote: The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK web services, and any change needs to be managed in such a manor that those services are not too badly affected. We do not have a list of every site actually using OSM over google, and the vast majority of users will not be following this list, so some other notification process needs adopting ... and an alternative source needs to be in place for those users ... Why not keeping the UK style under openstreetmap.co.uk just like you will find the german style under openstreetmap.de ? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 20.08.2015 10:09, Christoph Hormann wrote If you think a different styling than what is currently proposed would be better it would be best to show it. It's hardly fair to expect critics of the suggested new style to easily come up with alternatives. For one, the effort in question was enabled by sponsorship by Google, and took place over several months. This is not easily duplicated by those favouring other ideas. But more importantly, it discounts all those voices who favour the status quo. Personally, I think that the problems with the current style are relatively minor, and don't automatically justify a drastic change. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On Sat, 2015-08-22 at 21:39 +0900, Max wrote: On 2015년 08월 22일 19:23, Lester Caine wrote: The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK web services, and any change needs to be managed in such a manor that those services are not too badly affected. We do not have a list of every site actually using OSM over google, and the vast majority of users will not be following this list, so some other notification process needs adopting ... and an alternative source needs to be in place for those users ... Why not keeping the UK style under openstreetmap.co.uk just like you will find the german style under openstreetmap.de ? It should be openstreetmap.org.uk. We are not a commercial organisation. Phil (trigpoint) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
W dniu 22.08.2015 14:21, Tom MacWright napisał(a): On the topic of whether we can or should notify everyone who may potentially be affected by this change so their opinions can be registered, you may enjoy this read: http://www.ftrain.com/wwic.html [2] Awesome! It's just about what I would like to say (without using customer metaphor however =} but with communication idea instead): Create a service experience around what you publish and sell. Whatever “customer service” means when it comes to books and authors, figure it out and do it. Do it in partnership with your readers. Turn your readers into members. Not visitors, not subscribers; you want members. And then don't just consult them, but give them tools to consult amongst themselves. We need communications channels for individuals/institutions/services using OSM data or other services (especially maps) - and also inside the project, because we are so distributed, that for example even Wiki is rather a service for rendering team than a common working space, because rendering does not try to change it, but rather consumes the definitions for its own purposes. -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 22/08/15 15:08, Philip Barnes wrote: Why not keeping the UK style under openstreetmap.co.uk just like you will find the german style under openstreetmap.de ? It should be openstreetmap.org.uk. We are not a commercial organisation. .co.uk is registered, so the .uk one can be used going forward But this is possibly not the best way of making a scale able system. It would be better to have a single main domain which then forwards to an appropriate service? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
Hi, On 08/22/2015 02:12 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote: But more importantly, it discounts all those voices who favour the status quo. Personally, I think that the problems with the current style are relatively minor, and don't automatically justify a drastic change. But then again, the problems with the new style are also relatively minor, and don't automatically justify derailing the process ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 22/08/15 19:24, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote: On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk mailto:les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK web services [...] I agree that this is a problem. But not for the reasons you may think. The OSM default tileset is *not* meant to be used as a general-purpose tileset by third parties. There are no service-level guarantees and styles may change without notice to them. There is *absoutely* no obligation on the OSM community to notify third party users of our tilesets of any changes. In fact, third parties who consume too much tile bandwidth are encouraged to source tiles from other services like MapQuest or Mapbox, or roll out their own tile service. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tile_usage_policy We have had this discussion before ... If the share link is not intended to provide links for embedded maps and include a link back to the main map then it should be removed? This is intended as advertising and using it as an alternative to google SHOULD be encouraged. But if promoting OSM is against the rules then so be it ... but advertising some other commercial service is equally wrong. As for simply dumping a complete rework of the style without any warning ... that is perhaps why I am looking to retain the current style via my own service. At least a few 'dictatorships' are learning that one needs to ease existing users from one style of working to another and allow the user the choice. In a few places I still get hassled to use 'the new interface', but there is nothing wrong with the old one and it works for me. AT least when the front page style changed there was an alternative, and I think that is how any major change should be handled. If it falls flat on it's face one can at least roll back rather than having no such security. -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 8/22/2015 4:20 AM, Daniel Koć wrote: Could anybody with technical background in the inner OSM workings tell us what is holding us back with introducing new styles (be it raster styles, additional/interactive layers or even vector tiles)? Only a lack of people willing to do the work. Multiple people have started their own styles based on OpenStreetMap Carto. Both the French style and the new German style started this way. I believe both the cycle map and transport map on osm.org are using vector tile infrastructure now. OpenSeaMap provides a rendered overlay. If you're asking about on osm.org, I believe there's just been a lack of interest. To be added a layer would need to support the criteria on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Strategic_working_group/New_Tile_Layer_Guidelines. I believe the last request was the HOT layer, which got added. If another tile host wanted to write a proposal to add their tiles, I'd be willing to talk to them about helping. I still have all the HOT stuff, so wouldn't need to redo that. For new layers which are overlays or in-client vector tile rendered, there would also probably be a pull request needed to add the necessary code. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
Hi, On 08/23/2015 12:51 AM, Paul Norman wrote: Could anybody with technical background in the inner OSM workings tell us what is holding us back with introducing new styles (be it raster styles, additional/interactive layers or even vector tiles)? Only a lack of people willing to do the work. A lack of people willing to do the work *and* host the style. We'll happily include them if they meet the criteria you mention, but we're not currently set up to serve multiple styles ourselves. We might be able to switch to vector tiles somewhere down the line, allowing us to serve more styles easily, but that requires a lot of people willing to do a lot of work ;) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK web services [...] I agree that this is a problem. But not for the reasons you may think. The OSM default tileset is *not* meant to be used as a general-purpose tileset by third parties. There are no service-level guarantees and styles may change without notice to them. There is *absoutely* no obligation on the OSM community to notify third party users of our tilesets of any changes. In fact, third parties who consume too much tile bandwidth are encouraged to source tiles from other services like MapQuest or Mapbox, or roll out their own tile service. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tile_usage_policy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:13 AM, Colin Smale colin.sm...@xs4all.nl wrote: While we are at it, what about specific symbols for train/metro stations per operator? That is also a great landmark for map users. I'd settle for the transit map acknowledging that colour=* is a tag that exists for exactly the purpose of rendering transit maps, as it would make dealing with some systems (MTTA in Tulsa and especially TriMet in Portland come immediately to mind) easier to read and line up with the real world situation. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
sent from a phone Am 20.08.2015 um 11:59 schrieb Paweł Paprota ppa...@fastmail.fm: What you are proposing is basically design by committee (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee) which is rampant everywhere in OSM and kills innovation. without advocating it, this can also work. The building of the German parliament comes to mind (Reichstag). Sir Foster had won the competition for the restructuring in the 1990ies, but with a complete different design (basically a huge roof covering the building and its surroundings, by the time referred to as Germany's biggest petrol station by some critics). After intervention of the parliament against this winning design, chosen by a committee of experts amongst all contributions to the competition, there was a longer process during which tens of different cupolas were presented and rejected, and after some iterations the actual design evolved. Foster had originally been against a new cupola but in the end the final design (heavily influenced by a committee) was widely acclaimed. There's few rules without exception ;-) cheers Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On Friday 21 August 2015, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: What you are proposing is basically design by committee (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee) which is rampant everywhere in OSM and kills innovation. without advocating it, this can also work. The building of the German parliament comes to mind (Reichstag). [...] Oh, if we only had that kind of budget... (just for reference: that was 600 Million D-Mark back then) -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
W dniu 20.08.2015 3:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson napisał(a): Should this be a new, alternative style instead? Looks like New Hope is coming to fix The Great Tertiary Problem ;-} : https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-133529853 However in my opinion more alternative styles on OSM.org are necessity anyway, as I have already wrote: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-August/073895.html -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
I'd be tempted to leave motorways as blue - it's not such a critical problem as the invisible green trunk roads. Adding one more shade of red to the existing color-progression is probably achievable. Two seems to be pushing it. On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Daniel Koć daniel@koć.pl wrote: W dniu 20.08.2015 3:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson napisał(a): Should this be a new, alternative style instead? Looks like New Hope is coming to fix The Great Tertiary Problem ;-} : https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-133529853 However in my opinion more alternative styles on OSM.org are necessity anyway, as I have already wrote: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-August/073895.html -- The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags down [A. Cohen] ___ 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] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Minh Nguyen m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us wrote: Lester Caine lester at lsces.co.uk writes: Just what is the convention in the US, Russia or China? Regarding the U.S., Paul and I describe the conventions here in detail: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-August/073892.html But the short version is: real highway shields. Their absence is striking to Americans, far more than the highway colors (which aren't as uniform in U.S. print cartography as they are in the U.K.). There are plenty of technical issues to work out, in any case: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/508 Yeah, this is jarring for most North American users, as Canadian, Mexican and even some Japanese maps (probably more prevalent to English maps of Japan, though) often use the style popular in the US, and I would hope that rendering the refs off relations with shields should be considered mandatory for the next update. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
While we are at it, what about specific symbols for train/metro stations per operator? That is also a great landmark for map users. On 2015-08-21 11:57, Paul Johnson wrote: On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Minh Nguyen m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us wrote: Lester Caine lester at lsces.co.uk [1] writes: Just what is the convention in the US, Russia or China? Regarding the U.S., Paul and I describe the conventions here in detail: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-August/073892.html But the short version is: real highway shields. Their absence is striking to Americans, far more than the highway colors (which aren't as uniform in U.S. print cartography as they are in the U.K.). There are plenty of technical issues to work out, in any case: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/508 Yeah, this is jarring for most North American users, as Canadian, Mexican and even some Japanese maps (probably more prevalent to English maps of Japan, though) often use the style popular in the US, and I would hope that rendering the refs off relations with shields should be considered mandatory for the next update. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk Links: -- [1] http://lsces.co.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson j...@betra.is wrote: Should this be a new, alternative style instead? IMHO for every user that likes the new scheme, you will find one that hates it. And vice versa. As someone that grew up with Falck and Michelin maps, it took a long time to understand why someone would come up with such a weird color scheme (the rainbow scheme you refer to). I had read somewhere that it was done because the ugly colours would force people to make their own maps. Only later I understood it was the common colour scheme in the UK. I guess we will never know what's the best way to proceed. Usually people that don't like the change are very vocal, the lovers not so much. And then there are many many people that do not speak out or do not care. FYI, the Britisch community is trying to set up their own tile server to preserve the rainbow colour scheme, at least for the British islands. regards m ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
What you are proposing is basically design by committee
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee) which is rampant
everywhere in OSM and kills innovation. Everyone wants to pile on their
own cause - be it privacy (see the latest pull request on Github
regarding Gravatar for another viable contender for the Waste of Time
prize) or some weird anarchy/freedom/whatever world views.
At the same time there's a guy (Mateusz) who took on the task of making
the default style not suck - so what do people here do? Of course, let's
discuss this to death until everyone agrees. But then you may find that
no one wants to work with you on this anymore.
In Poland we have this often-used saying with regards to the political
or social situation (yeah, we Poles like to complain a lot!) - it sucks
but at least it's stable!
Paweł
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 11:39, Colin Smale wrote:
That discussion is only a waste of time because people hope that a consensus
will magically appear. The subject of the discussion is absolutely something
which deserves air-time. I am not talking about the specific case of
abandoned railways, but about who has the right to decide what data has no
place in OSM and order its deletion.
What was that famous line in Animal Farm again?
--colin
On 2015-08-20 10:53, Paweł Paprota wrote:
I'm taking bets on whether this thread will have more replies than the
abandoned railroads (100+ and still going strong!) and win the prize
for the Biggest Waste of Time in OSM for 2015.
YES WE CAN('T)
Paweł
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 03:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
For those that did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary
entries[1[http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586]],
postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed
Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented.
According to the github discussion there is an overwhelming consensus
[2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a
red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming consensus
formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor
on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't see
this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to
tell me where it formed or where I can find it.
The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue
for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision
was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours
upwards so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the
colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.
Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified
roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to
see which is the wider one.
This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I find
to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural areas
where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or
using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads snaking
through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the non
tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes
the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but
still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours
imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they could
lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus.
Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to
verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road
is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great
Colour Shift.
Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work in
displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges
that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now has a
disclaimer:
Among potential problems are that it is now harder to recognise road
type of given road, especially in situation where there is no
possibility to compare it with other road types.
Such significant change will be confusing for current users of this
style.
UK color coding of roads is well known for many people, for them a new
style - even assuming that it would be intuitive for them - will be less
useful.)
The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the
project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these
zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page
of our website, a blow to those who use the default tiles through uMap
or similarly and depend on the UK rainbow road style and makes life
harder for mappers to visually confirm the type of road.
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
That discussion is only a waste of time because people hope that a
consensus will magically appear. The subject of the discussion is
absolutely something which deserves air-time. I am not talking about the
specific case of abandoned railways, but about who has the right to
decide what data has no place in OSM and order its deletion.
What was that famous line in Animal Farm again?
--colin
On 2015-08-20 10:53, Paweł Paprota wrote:
I'm taking bets on whether this thread will have more replies than the
abandoned railroads (100+ and still going strong!) and win the prize
for the Biggest Waste of Time in OSM for 2015.
YES WE CAN('T)
Paweł
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 03:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
For those that did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary entries[1 [1]],
postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed
Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented.
According to the github discussion there is an overwhelming consensus
[2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a
red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming consensus
formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor
on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't see
this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to
tell me where it formed or where I can find it.
The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue
for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision
was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours
upwards so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the
colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.
Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified
roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to
see which is the wider one.
This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I find
to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural areas
where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or
using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads snaking
through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the non
tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes
the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but
still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours
imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they could
lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus.
Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to
verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road
is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great
Colour Shift.
Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work in
displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges
that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now has a
disclaimer:
Among potential problems are that it is now harder to recognise road
type of given road, especially in situation where there is no
possibility to compare it with other road types.
Such significant change will be confusing for current users of this
style.
UK color coding of roads is well known for many people, for them a new
style - even assuming that it would be intuitive for them - will be less
useful.)
The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the
project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these
zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page
of our website, a blow to those who use the default tiles through uMap
or similarly and depend on the UK rainbow road style and makes life
harder for mappers to visually confirm the type of road.
Should this be a new, alternative style instead?
[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586
[2]
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-130592532
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Links:
--
[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
I must admit I never really liked the scheme where motorways get the colour
of water... I also grew up with orange/yellow motorways on the map.
But I (try to) complain as little as possible. So I'm glad people are
trying to come up with a 'more international' way of rendering the map. If
that's even possible.
On the other hand, I don't like that the difference between tertiary and
unclassified/residential disappears almost completely.
I don't have the time and energy to set up a rendering chain, so maybe I
better shut up...
Polyglot
2015-08-20 11:59 GMT+02:00 Paweł Paprota ppa...@fastmail.fm:
What you are proposing is basically design by committee
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee) which is rampant
everywhere in OSM and kills innovation. Everyone wants to pile on their
own cause - be it privacy (see the latest pull request on Github
regarding Gravatar for another viable contender for the Waste of Time
prize) or some weird anarchy/freedom/whatever world views.
At the same time there's a guy (Mateusz) who took on the task of making
the default style not suck - so what do people here do? Of course, let's
discuss this to death until everyone agrees. But then you may find that
no one wants to work with you on this anymore.
In Poland we have this often-used saying with regards to the political
or social situation (yeah, we Poles like to complain a lot!) - it sucks
but at least it's stable!
Paweł
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 11:39, Colin Smale wrote:
That discussion is only a waste of time because people hope that a
consensus will magically appear. The subject of the discussion is
absolutely something which deserves air-time. I am not talking about the
specific case of abandoned railways, but about who has the right to decide
what data has no place in OSM and order its deletion.
What was that famous line in Animal Farm again?
--colin
On 2015-08-20 10:53, Paweł Paprota wrote:
I'm taking bets on whether this thread will have more replies than the
abandoned railroads (100+ and still going strong!) and win the prize
for the Biggest Waste of Time in OSM for 2015.
YES WE CAN('T)
Paweł
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 03:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
For those that did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary entries[1[
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586]],
postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed
Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented.
According to the github discussion there is an overwhelming
consensus
[2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a
red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming
consensus
formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor
on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't
see
this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to
tell me where it formed or where I can find it.
The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue
for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision
was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours
upwards so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the
colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.
Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified
roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to
see which is the wider one.
This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I
find
to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural
areas
where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or
using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads
snaking
through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the
non
tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes
the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but
still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours
imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they
could
lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus.
Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder
to
verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary
road
is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed
Great
Colour Shift.
Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work
in
displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges
that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now has a
disclaimer:
Among potential problems are that it is now harder to recognise road
type of given road, especially in situation where there is no
possibility to compare it with other road types.
Such significant
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 20/08/2015 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote: According to the github discussion there is an overwhelming consensus [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a red-yellow only scheme. I don't think you'll ever get an overwhelming consensus from such a large committee. :) I rendered z0-z11 locally to see what it looks like and was pleasantly surprised - it's much less orange than some of the previous iterations that there have been discussions and blog posts about, and better for it. I'm not quite sure that z7 is quite there (see the difference at http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586#comment31695 ), and obviously any change takes getting used to, but it's not markedly worse than what went before and does resolve the invisible trunk road problem, which really is a problem. Cheers, Andy (SomeoneElse) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
I'm not proposing anything. Merely observing.
I am not the only one confused about which definition of overwhelming
consensus was used...
--colin
On 2015-08-20 11:59, Paweł Paprota wrote:
What you are proposing is basically design by committee
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee) which is rampant
everywhere in OSM and kills innovation. Everyone wants to pile on their
own cause - be it privacy (see the latest pull request on Github
regarding Gravatar for another viable contender for the Waste of Time
prize) or some weird anarchy/freedom/whatever world views.
At the same time there's a guy (Mateusz) who took on the task of making
the default style not suck - so what do people here do? Of course, let's
discuss this to death until everyone agrees. But then you may find that
no one wants to work with you on this anymore.
In Poland we have this often-used saying with regards to the political
or social situation (yeah, we Poles like to complain a lot!) - it sucks
but at least it's stable!
Paweł
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 11:39, Colin Smale wrote:
That discussion is only a waste of time because people hope that a consensus
will magically appear. The subject of the discussion is absolutely something
which deserves air-time. I am not talking about the specific case of
abandoned railways, but about who has the right to decide what data has no
place in OSM and order its deletion.
What was that famous line in Animal Farm again?
--colin
On 2015-08-20 10:53, Paweł Paprota wrote:
I'm taking bets on whether this thread will have more replies than the
abandoned railroads (100+ and still going strong!) and win the prize
for the Biggest Waste of Time in OSM for 2015.
YES WE CAN('T)
Paweł
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 03:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote: For those that
did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary
entries[1[http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586]],
postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed
Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented.
According to the github discussion there is an overwhelming consensus
[2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a
red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming consensus
formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor
on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't see
this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to
tell me where it formed or where I can find it.
The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue
for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision
was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours
upwards so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the
colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.
Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified
roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to
see which is the wider one.
This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I find
to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural areas
where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or
using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads snaking
through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the non
tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes
the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but
still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours
imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they could
lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus.
Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to
verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road
is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great
Colour Shift.
Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work in
displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges
that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now has a
disclaimer:
Among potential problems are that it is now harder to recognise road
type of given road, especially in situation where there is no
possibility to compare it with other road types.
Such significant change will be confusing for current users of this
style.
UK color coding of roads is well known for many people, for them a new
style - even assuming that it would be intuitive for them - will be less
useful.)
The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the
project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these
zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page
of our website, a blow to those who use
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
I'm happy to support a shades of red/yellow road system for the default map. The UK colours only really work at small scale with heavy casing (with landuse eg forests muted). The green for trunk roads used for OS 1:50,000 is only recent, much darker than the green used for OSM, and a cartographical abomination (in my view), being much too dominant. Until a few years ago, it was only motorways that were different. The colours at 1:25,000 have always been slightly different again. As ever, if you want something done your own particular way, do it yourself. Rendering isn't *that* difficult. The default map needs to work at all zooms, and all* latitudes. *excluding the tricky bits around the poles, obviously ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
Hi, On 08/20/2015 03:16 AM, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote: Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great Colour Shift. ... Should this be a new, alternative style instead? Disadvantages of offering and maintaining 2 different styles: 1. uses more disk space on tile servers 2. uses more time to render tiles (i.e. slower updates, or more hardware required) 3. harder to keep styles current when making improvements Your use case of easily recognizable tertiary road in sparsely populated regions is valid, but perhaps it is niche enough to accept that it need to be served by the main map style. I'm in favour of the change simply because it is a change. As a project, we must take great care not to ossify. Humans are inherently change averse; most people prefer the same as yesterday most of the time. If we allow the project to become too averse to change then we'll never see progress. (What, API 0.7 you say? Just when I had 0.6 hardcoded in my 37 applications, no way!) This is not change for change's sake (although if it were my decision, I'd even be tempted to do that just to keep us alert) - this is a well thought out suggestion and I don't see why we shouldn't, after all these years, do something else, colour-wise, for a while. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 8/20/2015 9:32 AM, john whelan wrote: As someone affected I wish to dissent therefore you do not have consensus not every one consents. Although not essential to the style discussion, I think it's important to correct this point. Consensus is not unanimity. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2418#section-3.3 is a good read, as it mentions mailing lists. Another part is identifying and resolving of concerns. This does not mean everyone will agree with how their concern is resolved, which is impossible when two concerns do not have a compatible resolution. The decision to merge or not lies with the maintainers, and ultimately, with Andy. We'll look at comments on the Github issue, the cartography change and come to a final decision. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
The humanitarian style uses a good compromize to represent the hierarchy of roads. The blue is replaced by a violet color. This maitains a larger color palette to represent the hierarchy of roads. And, importantly, the yellow color is kept for tertiary roads. I also think that it is important to color the tertiary roads to show a good hierarchy of roads in rural areas. Pierre De : Jóhannes Birgir Jensson j...@betra.is À : talk@openstreetmap.org Envoyé le : Jeudi 20 août 2015 15h37 Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift Þann 20.8.2015 18:36, skrifaði Frederik Ramm: Your use case of easily recognizable tertiary road in sparsely populated regions is valid, but perhaps it is niche enough to accept that it need to be served by the main map style. I'm fairly certain that the rural regions of the world are not a niche but where we are sorely lacking in data and where our growth in Africa (for example) will come. Having done data quality checks on settlements of the world thousands of them are still just a name on the map with no road connections and there tertiary roads will be needed to go. I'm not averse to red/yellow taking over personally but the expense is too great for me at the moment. We need to find a way to make tertiary still recognizable. --JBJ ___ 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] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 20/08/15 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote: The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page of our website, a blow to those who use the default tiles through uMap or similarly and depend on the UK rainbow road style and makes life harder for mappers to visually confirm the type of road. Should this be a new, alternative style instead? That a UK version will appear is a simple fact. Ideally I would like anybody looking up OSM in the UK to be directed to that version. That may be a little more difficult to achieve, but removes the WTF provided by a more international solution? The problem of cause is that one has to switch to another server to get areas outside the UK unless we can provided a complete duplicate of the existing service ... retaining the current style base. For me, the new style is a pointless exercise since I NEED to retain a UK view of the data, and I am sure other countries would also prefer to retain their own road colour preferences so trying to provide an international style has a limited 'market'? If anything it simply drives us to provided more local styled services? I'm not going to object to the current plans, simply because I don't have to live with it, but I don't think that it IS the right development path for many reasons. Just what is the convention in the US, Russia or China? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
For me, the new style is a pointless exercise since I NEED to retain a UK view of the data, and I am sure other countries would also prefer to retain their own road colour preferences so trying to provide an international style has a limited 'market'? If anything it simply drives us to provided more local styled services? Isn't it possible to have separate UK rendering on the same map, like on the Mapquest layer? If such a framework is created it could even open up other renderings for different countries. Thing is that UK won't ever be happy with another colour scheme and the rest of the world won't ever be happy with a UK scheme. Ben ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
Þann 20.8.2015 18:36, skrifaði Frederik Ramm: Your use case of easily recognizable tertiary road in sparsely populated regions is valid, but perhaps it is niche enough to accept that it need to be served by the main map style. I'm fairly certain that the rural regions of the world are not a niche but where we are sorely lacking in data and where our growth in Africa (for example) will come. Having done data quality checks on settlements of the world thousands of them are still just a name on the map with no road connections and there tertiary roads will be needed to go. I'm not averse to red/yellow taking over personally but the expense is too great for me at the moment. We need to find a way to make tertiary still recognizable. --JBJ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 20/08/15 22:46, Minh Nguyen wrote: - Shields are either reproduced in colors that match the signage, or they're colored to match the road. So a map might end up with white-on-blue Interstate shields, red-on-white U.S. route shields, and black-on-white state route shields. I would consider the proposed style to be closer to what a U.S. visitor would expect than the current UK-influenced style. Actually I'm just looking to ditch the bloody rounded ends on the UK maps ... It's not something I recognise as 'UK style' ... someone invented it ... On OSMAND it makes the road and motorway numbers difficult to read ( and OSMAND has lost the green roads which is something I'm trying to get back there as well! :) ) One thing which I still find a problem is that 'B' roads in the UK are 'yellow', not the unclassified ones so I'd like to loose the orange back to yellow and then correct the problem that having half of the local short cuts difficult to see and other less useful ones highlighted. This is probably simply that the wrong tagging is being used, but some of these smaller roads are essentially main routes so tagging as a 'service road' is correct for the local usage, but not for main stream routing and where the likes of OSMAND simply gets the routing wrong ... as do other routers :( -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
Paul Johnson baloo at ursamundi.org writes: Along these lines, the standard style as it isn't too far off from what Americans expect out of a motorist-oriented roadmap (though mapgeeks might see it as a bit German by comparison to our maps). Surface streets tend to be all the same color (usually purple or red) with the thickness of the lines tending to be rather thin, increasing in thickness up to primary or sometimes trunk, with motorways tending to be purple with red borders. Toll roads are always green, there's never ways that are green that are not toll. This style of rendering is almost certainly heavily influenced by Rand McNally, given it's ubiquity for casual use maps, which traditionally has favored as described above in a somewhat simplified, stylized form (such as rather than each ramp mapped out in detail, an entire, possibly almost absurdly complex junction, is simplified to a single white square representing a motorway junction). Rand McNally was, for quite a long time, the official cartography provider for the American Automobile Association, which probably helped propel this style as an expectation. Thomas Guide (still usually preferred by professional local drivers even when equipped with a GPS in the US, as a single metro gets published as a lay-flat atlas hundreds or thousands of pages long with detailed annotation, sometimes down to building suite level, at a scale roughly equal to z20 and handy for that last thousand feet navigation) tends to use the same form, but rather than simplifying junctions, often goes the map porn route by mapping out everything to scale without simplification. A few additional observations from having used a variety of print atlases by Rand McNally, DeLorme, and municipal suppliers: - Controlled-access highways (that is, motorways with dual carriageways) are commonly colored red, amber, purple, or blue. The specific color doesn't matter so much, just as long as it isn't green (which is reserved for toll roads, as Paul points out). Motorways are drawn as 2-3 parallel strokes, imitating the dual carriageways. - Limited-access roads (think trunk or primary) are given a single thick stroke, colored black, except for U.S. routes, which are usually red. All other roads are given a single, thin stroke. In the West, prominent unpaved roads might be dashed. There usually aren't any other classifications. - Streets in general are very thin because each street label is placed above the street, not on it. However, I have a few municipal maps that do place the label inside much wider roads, giving the map a more casual feel, less like a schematic. - Full motorway junctions are simplified into white squares or diamonds, while partial junctions are half that: a thin rectangle. At higher zoom levels, a complex junction such as a cloverleaf is drawn in full, but the space inside it is filled in the same color as the motorway. - Shields are either reproduced in colors that match the signage, or they're colored to match the road. So a map might end up with white-on-blue Interstate shields, red-on-white U.S. route shields, and black-on-white state route shields. I would consider the proposed style to be closer to what a U.S. visitor would expect than the current UK-influenced style. -- m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On Thursday 20 August 2015, Jc3b3hannes Birgir Jensson wrote: According to the github discussion there is an overwhelming consensus [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a red-yellow only scheme. Note this comment is mostly based on the early discussion of the matter, in particular in https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/102 and in the early diary entries by Mateusz but also in countless comments made over the time elsewhere concerning the road color scheme. This of course does not necessarily mean that all those supporting a change in general are fine with the scheme that is now developed by Mateusz. In general among those in favour of keeping the current scheme there have been only very few specific suggestions how to address the problems this leads to in the style, in particular the fact that the road network as a whole is not recognizable as such and the color conflicts with other colors in the style. If you think a different styling than what is currently proposed would be better it would be best to show it. Suggesting to use a paler yellow for tertiary or the color scheme of a different style is one thing, actually demonstrating how this looks and addressing issues this creates is another. I know setting up the system for doing and viewing style changes is not trivial but if - as you say - there are so many people that would be badly affected by it there should be someone to demonstrate a viable alternative. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
I'm taking bets on whether this thread will have more replies than the
abandoned railroads (100+ and still going strong!) and win the prize
for the Biggest Waste of Time in OSM for 2015.
YES WE CAN('T)
Paweł
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 03:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
For those that did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary entries[1],
postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed
Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented.
According to the github discussion there is an overwhelming consensus
[2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a
red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming consensus
formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor
on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't see
this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to
tell me where it formed or where I can find it.
The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue
for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision
was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours
upwards so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the
colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.
Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified
roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to
see which is the wider one.
This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I find
to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural areas
where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or
using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads snaking
through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the non
tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes
the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but
still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours
imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they could
lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus.
Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to
verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road
is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great
Colour Shift.
Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work in
displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges
that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now has a
disclaimer:
Among potential problems are that it is now harder to recognise road
type of given road, especially in situation where there is no
possibility to compare it with other road types.
Such significant change will be confusing for current users of this
style.
UK color coding of roads is well known for many people, for them a new
style - even assuming that it would be intuitive for them - will be less
useful.)
The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the
project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these
zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page
of our website, a blow to those who use the default tiles through uMap
or similarly and depend on the UK rainbow road style and makes life
harder for mappers to visually confirm the type of road.
Should this be a new, alternative style instead?
[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586
[2]
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-130592532
___
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] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
As someone affected I wish to dissent therefore you do not have consensus not every one consents. Cheerio John On 20 August 2015 at 12:26, Christoph Hormann chris_horm...@gmx.de wrote: On Thursday 20 August 2015, Andy Townsend wrote: On 20/08/2015 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote: According to the github discussion there is an overwhelming consensus [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a red-yellow only scheme. I don't think you'll ever get an overwhelming consensus from such a large committee. :) Yes, i now see that overwhelming consensus is a bad choice of words here - either there is consensus or there is not, it can not be overwhelming. And it only makes sense to speak of consensus with a clearly defined group of people which does not exist here. So i should have better said among those participating in discussions on the matter on several occasions there was a large majority in support for such a change. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ ___ 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] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Lester Caine les...@lsces.co.uk wrote: On 20/08/15 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote: The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page of our website, a blow to those who use the default tiles through uMap or similarly and depend on the UK rainbow road style and makes life harder for mappers to visually confirm the type of road. Should this be a new, alternative style instead? That a UK version will appear is a simple fact. Ideally I would like anybody looking up OSM in the UK to be directed to that version. That may be a little more difficult to achieve, but removes the WTF provided by a more international solution? The problem of cause is that one has to switch to another server to get areas outside the UK unless we can provided a complete duplicate of the existing service ... retaining the current style base. For me, the new style is a pointless exercise since I NEED to retain a UK view of the data, and I am sure other countries would also prefer to retain their own road colour preferences so trying to provide an international style has a limited 'market'? If anything it simply drives us to provided more local styled services? I don't have a problem with this, the (from a USian perspective) odd style of the rather UK-centric style of the standard and cyclemap styles didn't help with the learning curve. I'm not going to object to the current plans, simply because I don't have to live with it, but I don't think that it IS the right development path for many reasons. Just what is the convention in the US, Russia or China? Along these lines, the standard style as it isn't too far off from what Americans expect out of a motorist-oriented roadmap (though mapgeeks might see it as a bit German by comparison to our maps). Surface streets tend to be all the same color (usually purple or red) with the thickness of the lines tending to be rather thin, increasing in thickness up to primary or sometimes trunk, with motorways tending to be purple with red borders. Toll roads are *always* green, there's *never* ways that are green that are not toll. This style of rendering is almost certainly heavily influenced by Rand McNally, given it's ubiquity for casual use maps, which traditionally has favored as described above in a somewhat simplified, stylized form (such as rather than each ramp mapped out in detail, an entire, possibly almost absurdly complex junction, is simplified to a single white square representing a motorway junction). Rand McNally was, for quite a long time, the official cartography provider for the American Automobile Association, which probably helped propel this style as an expectation. Thomas Guide (still usually preferred by professional local drivers even when equipped with a GPS in the US, as a single metro gets published as a lay-flat atlas hundreds or thousands of pages long with detailed annotation, sometimes down to building suite level, at a scale roughly equal to z20 and handy for that last thousand feet navigation) tends to use the same form, but rather than simplifying junctions, often goes the map porn route by mapping out everything to scale without simplification. Metro Regional Government (the regional government on the Oregon side of the Portland metropolitian area) probably had the most influence on what people expect out of a bicycle map in the US, with the above style for the Thomas Guide being refitted to the same form factor, layout and scale as one would expect from a Rand McNally metro level map (largely for sake of being able to actually stow it conveniently on a bicycle) printed on waterproof, ripstop paper similar to what you'd find on a land surveyor's notebook, though anything that falls outside of the cycleway network is greyed out like an unavailable menu item in a WIMP-style GUI. Difficult intersections and junctions get a red circle around them, dedicated cycleways are purple, surface streets with bike lanes tend to be a thin blue line, bicycle boulevards a thick blue line. Streets in the network that have no bicycle facilities are green if two or all three of these are true: Wide, low motorist speed, low motorist volume (mostly residential side streets that aren't bike boulevards). Yellow if two of the following are true: High motorist speed, high motorist volume, or no escape space (major arterial streets with wide outside lanes and freeways tend to make this). Red qualifies pretty much any situation yellow would if all three yellow conditions are true or two of the yellow conditions but other hazards are present (the kind of thing that only folks like Wolfpack Hustle or someone going for full completion of every Strava KOM in the region are willing to ride, yet somehow get included in the cycleway network). This
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:09:35AM +0200, Marc Gemis wrote: On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson j...@betra.is wrote: Should this be a new, alternative style instead? IMHO for every user that likes the new scheme, you will find one that hates it. And vice versa. For the fact that there are a lot of people who havent even heard about this change i doubt the overwhelming consensus aswell. Yes - OSMs color scheme may at first be odd but we now have it for a couple of years and it served us well and i dont see the point in eliminating additional information from the map. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de We need to self-defense - GnuPG/PGP enable your email today! signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On 20/08/2015 16:25, Ben Laenen wrote: Thing is that UK won't ever be happy with another colour scheme and the rest of the world won't ever be happy with a UK scheme. ... and then in the UK we can start arguing about and English style vs a Scottish one and then a Yorkshire one vs Surrey :) Cheers, Andy ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
On Thursday 20 August 2015, Andy Townsend wrote: On 20/08/2015 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote: According to the github discussion there is an overwhelming consensus [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a red-yellow only scheme. I don't think you'll ever get an overwhelming consensus from such a large committee. :) Yes, i now see that overwhelming consensus is a bad choice of words here - either there is consensus or there is not, it can not be overwhelming. And it only makes sense to speak of consensus with a clearly defined group of people which does not exist here. So i should have better said among those participating in discussions on the matter on several occasions there was a large majority in support for such a change. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
Lester Caine lester at lsces.co.uk writes: Just what is the convention in the US, Russia or China? Regarding the U.S., Paul and I describe the conventions here in detail: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-August/073892.html But the short version is: real highway shields. Their absence is striking to Americans, far more than the highway colors (which aren't as uniform in U.S. print cartography as they are in the U.K.). There are plenty of technical issues to work out, in any case: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/508 -- m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
For those that did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary entries[1], postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented. According to the github discussion there is an overwhelming consensus [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming consensus formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't see this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to tell me where it formed or where I can find it. The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours upwards so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white. Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to see which is the wider one. This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I find to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural areas where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads snaking through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the non tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they could lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus. Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great Colour Shift. Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work in displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now has a disclaimer: Among potential problems are that it is now harder to recognise road type of given road, especially in situation where there is no possibility to compare it with other road types. Such significant change will be confusing for current users of this style. UK color coding of roads is well known for many people, for them a new style - even assuming that it would be intuitive for them - will be less useful.) The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page of our website, a blow to those who use the default tiles through uMap or similarly and depend on the UK rainbow road style and makes life harder for mappers to visually confirm the type of road. Should this be a new, alternative style instead? [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586 [2] https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-130592532 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
