Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

Thank you for the explanation Joseph Isenberg. Now I can see why that's so hard to implement. Also, could someone please add descriptions/organize the projects listed in the Wiki page for Vector Tiles? As a relative newcomer to the OSM development space, it seems that implementing vector tiles

Re: [Tagging] Mapping terraced, irrigated farmland (e.g. rice paddies)?

These are much taller than a step. There are earth banks at the edge of each terrace, to keep the water in. Here are some examples: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rice_terraces_on_Bali_-_Tegalalang_Rice_Terrace_-_Indonesia_06.jpg

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

https://www.freemap.sk/?map=14/48.930467/19.094570=X This is a nice topographical map, but it isn't serving client-side vector tiles. The tiles are jpegs, you can see jpg compression artifacts when zooming in. Perhaps vector tiles are used on the server side, I haven't looked into all of the

Re: [Tagging] Mapping terraced, irrigated farmland (e.g. rice paddies)?

A while back, we had a discussion / proposal about mapping steps as an area, so that each step was mapped. Would that concept work here? Thanks Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

Oops, "dearth" of data, not "death." ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

On Nov 8, 2020, at 7:58 AM, Anders Torger wrote: > I believe the processes available are limited in terms of fixing structural > problems. You say you have long experience in open projects, that is a fantastic launchpad from which to join OSM and improve it, even criticize it. I read that

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

2020-11-08, sk, 19:54 Joseph Eisenberg rašė: > The reason is that at mid zoom levels there is far too much data > in the database for it all to be made available in a vector tile > format so that the map is fully customizable. Unless we will do a real generalisation which would mean we will

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > you are not going to get a custom rendering from one set of vector tiles. Sure you are. You're not going to get every possible custom rendering from a single set of performant vector tiles, granted, but half of Mapbox's entire business model is custom rendering from

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

Re: "Vector tiles could allow for instant client-side switching of map styles, the ability to customize the base layer, and allow users to make custom maps themselves" This is often claimed as a benefit of client-side vector tiles, but in practice it is not possible. The reason is that at mid

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

sent from a phone > On 8. Nov 2020, at 12:23, Allroads wrote: > > Toponym key > > Used at a import. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/3dShapes/Landuse_import > Translation: > Toponyms are used to still be able to apply a name = * to a large area, even > if this has been divided into

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

And there should be several specialized layers: general car navigation map, > sport map for hiking/cycling/skiing, transportation. All of that would be > possible with vector tiles which are less computationally demanding to > create. We already have multiple map styles. What they mean is that

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

Thanks for your long and thoughtful reply. I'll try to not make it even longer :-). While I have only contributed since 2018, I've followed the project for much longer (that's why I though I had contributed for longer until I checked my log), so I've seen how the maps have looked and

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

From a tool point of view (JOSM etc), multiple databases could be made to be experienced exactly the same as different layers, so I guess it doesn't matter that much. With layers you are supposed to be able to turn them on and off at will in your editor and choose which you see in an easy

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

> 6 nov. 2020 kl. 19:31 skrev Anders Torger : > > Hello everyone, newcomer here! > Only marginally related to the discussion, but: For Sweden, you may want to look at the rendering at http://lab3.turepalsson.se/map/ (the generated PDF:s, not the tiles;

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

Warning: lengthy reply to an already-lengthy thread. On Nov 8, 2020, at 3:26 AM, Anders Torger wrote: > Regarding a board that makes strategic decisions. > > The current concensus model with huge community has lead to that it's very > easy to block an idea, and very hard to get it accepted

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

2020-11-08, sk, 09:46 Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging rašė: > (and it is from person who put a lot of effort into tagging improvements, > wikifiddling, > deprecating some unwanted values, deduplication and validator-related work > and has > some experience from data consumer side) That is a

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

2020-11-08, sk, 12:31 Anders Torger rašė: > To me it seems like an odd "political" design decision to have a > separate database though. Why just not arrange the database in layers, > and this could be a separate layer? From a technical perspective I > suppose it wouldn't have to be layers as

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

Maybe I'm wrong, but can I use OSM tiles to help tracing a 'Blue Valley' polygon, simplify or copy a multipolygon 'Martin' s wood' or whatever and declare it cc0? Yves Le 8 novembre 2020 11:08:57 GMT+01:00, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : > > >sent from a phone > >> On 8. Nov 2020, at 10:08,

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

Regarding a board that makes strategic decisions. The current concensus model with huge community has lead to that it's very easy to block an idea, and very hard to get it accepted and realized. A good idea is often blocked just because the first suggested solution may not be the best. It's

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

Toponym key Used at a import. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/3dShapes/Landuse_import Translation: Toponyms are used to still be able to apply a name = * to a large area, even if this has been divided into tens to hundreds of small pieces due to the import. The existing AND polygons with a

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

Beautiful name label rendering! Regarding separate database, I think it's a good idea if that is the only way forward. Something needs to happen. Being able to fulfill basic cartography needs are not "new" ideas, I really believe that it should be a priority for a database used for generating

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

sent from a phone > On 8. Nov 2020, at 10:08, Yves wrote: > > * CC0 doesn't allow to derive data from OSM it does. The whole point (for me) to start this was to provide data that can be combined with OpenStreetMap. What would be your suggestion for a licence? I would be willing to double

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

Good initiative Martin, at first sight I'll make two comments : * CC0 doesn't allow to derive data from OSM * as geometries are fuzzy in nature, there should be a way to accept several geometries for a same entity, be it only to avoid long discussions on boundaries Yves Le 8 novembre 2020

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

sent from a phone > On 8. Nov 2020, at 09:24, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging > wrote: > > I really like an idea of separate database/layer for such fuzzy objects. I have started a project to collect such fuzzy objects. Data is stored in a git repo in Geojson representation. Pull requests

Re: [Tagging] Mapping terraced, irrigated farmland (e.g. rice paddies)?

In Indonesia, the rice paddy terraces are separated by earth or clay embankments, usually about 1 meter to 2 meters high, made with local soil. I wouldn't call those "retaining walls", since they are not made out of stone, brick or concrete. - Joseph On Sat, Nov 7, 2020 at 10:46 PM Cascafico

Re: [Tagging] Mapping terraced, irrigated farmland (e.g. rice paddies)?

sent from a phone > On 8. Nov 2020, at 07:46, Cascafico Giovanni wrote: > > retaining wall [1] is applicable to whatever area retaining wall is only applicable to linear features, and while it could be used here, it would make both, reading the map (looking for terraced fields) and

Re: [Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?

I really like an idea of separate database/layer for such fuzzy objects. Especially as there are multiple competing ideas for when specific object ends and even how many continents/oceans we have. Nov 8, 2020, 06:51 by tomasstrau...@gmail.com: > If we're talking about fuzzy features (which do