Re: [Tagging] Wiki edits, building tags on nodes versus areas
Am 04.06.2014 22:35, schrieb André Pirard: Exactly, this and below, my POV. I even say more: that a shop is an activity more than an object. Just as an amenity, it takes place in a building or part of it. But it can be in open air. building=yes shop:fishing=yes shop:fishing:rod:rental=yes shop.fish=no hotel=yes I find those constructs very understandable and, most importantly, prone to be imagined the same way by different people That's another new tagging system though. And even doing it like this breaks down when there is more than one shop in the building. Therefore I believe that the only really clean solution is to actually create one OSM element per feature: one for each shop, and one for the building. This is also future proof - want to also tag the level the shop is on, or even do complete indoor mapping? You can! Now, I don't think this should be enforced in situations where there is only one shop in the building and where the building itself doesn't have name, wikipedia or other tags different from the shop's. But for the general case, I'm still in favour of using multiple elements. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] highway=track access
I agree that unpaved roads need to be rendered differently than paved roads. In wet weather, particularly in areas with clay soil, unpaved roads may be completely impassable. On June 4, 2014 6:22:33 PM CDT, Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com wrote: SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk writes: Some (but very few) BOATs near me say service road to you when you look at them; most just say track or even bridleway. The only unclassified ones I can find are as a result of some newbie's* mapping and probably could benefit from a resurvey to see if they're best described as service roads or something else. I certainly wouldn't use highway=road if I'd been and had a look, as that implies that no survey has taken place. Essentially - map the physical and legal attributes separately; but map both as accurately as you can. I may be alone in thinking this, but I find the legal Right of Way notion to be critical, and an important distinction between highway=unclassified and highway=track or highway=service. A highway=unclassified is in my view more or less by definition open to use by the public, even if it's what is in the US a private way. And at least in Massachusetts, such a road is almost always a distinct parcel in terms of land ownership (or owned by the town as space between other parcels). A highway=service is almost always not a publically-accessible right of way, and usually does not have a separate parcel. It's almost always access=private, access=customers or access=permissive, and almost never access=yes. Highway=track is legally similar to highway=serice, except that it tends to be physically much lower quality. So the description of BOAT sounds very much like highway=unclassified, and arguably with physical tags. I wonder if the definition of service and track should have implicit access=permissive as a best-guess default, rather than the access=yes associated with unclassified. (That raises the issue of a way to show access=customers as some color other than red or green.) Sort of related, there's a long-standing issue that dirt roads (e.g., highway=residential surface=unpaved) do not get rendered differently, and this can lead people to wrongly mark them as tracks, when legally they are roads. I suspect that people in all-paved and people in zero-paved areas don't see this as important, but I live in a town where some people live on dirt roards, and was recently in an area of Vermont where many roads are not paved, and it's a big deal in route planning. Perhaps now with carto it's just a question of someone sending a patch, but it seems like there has been reluctance to render unpaved roads differently. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- 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. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] highway=track access
On 5 June 2014 14:22, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: I agree that unpaved roads need to be rendered differently than paved roads. In wet weather, particularly in areas with clay soil, unpaved roads may be completely impassable. If you are talking about the rendering on the default map: see also https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/110 . -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] turning layers off
Is it possible to turn visibility of certain layers or feature types off in OpenStreetMap (Id or JOSM), such as features with a landuse tag? I am having a hard time drawing building polygons inside landuse polygons because the landuse polygons have a colored tint to them. Thanks, Tom G. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] turning layers off
Yes, in JOSM, you can use the Filters window. -- Matthijs On 5 June 2014 15:46, Tom Gertin tger...@gmail.com wrote: Is it possible to turn visibility of certain layers or feature types off in OpenStreetMap (Id or JOSM), such as features with a landuse tag? I am having a hard time drawing building polygons inside landuse polygons because the landuse polygons have a colored tint to them. Thanks, Tom G. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Wiki edits, building tags on nodes versus areas
On Jun 5, 2014, at 3:03 AM, Tobias Knerr wrote: Am 04.06.2014 22:35, schrieb André Pirard: That's another new tagging system though. And even doing it like this breaks down when there is more than one shop in the building. Therefore I believe that the only really clean solution is to actually create one OSM element per feature: one for each shop, and one for the building. This is also future proof - want to also tag the level the shop is on, or even do complete indoor mapping? You can! Now, I don't think this should be enforced in situations where there is only one shop in the building and where the building itself doesn't have name, wikipedia or other tags different from the shop's. But for the general case, I'm still in favour of using multiple elements. How would you tag a shop within a shop? For example, here it is fairly common to have a mini-bank branch and/or coffee (StarBucks) shop within a supermarket? I don't know how the ownership details work, but the amenities are branded differently than the supermarket and the employees staffing them are uniformed differently than the supermarket employees. I've been terracing the shopping center so I can tag the portion of the over all center as a supermarket then adding nodes within that for the bank, coffee place, etc. I also add a note to the inner amenity nodes stating that they are located in the supermarket, though the only user of that information is like to be the next mapper that comes along. -Tod ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] highway=track access
Greg Troxel wrote: I may be alone in thinking this, but I find the legal Right of Way notion to be critical, and an important distinction between highway=unclassified and highway=track or highway=service. Well, ish - but what's important is that all aspects that can be mapped (legal, physical, etc.) are. I'd always apply the duck test to something to decide between unclassified, service and track, and if separate information is available about legal access, add that too. Here, for example: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/50733252 is something that has the same legal access as an unclassified road (legally it is a road) but physically it's far from it, hence highway=track. So the description of BOAT sounds very much like highway=unclassified, and arguably with physical tags. No, it's a specific England-and-Wales legal designation that implies certain access rules. Sort of related, there's a long-standing issue that dirt roads (e.g., highway=residential surface=unpaved) do not get rendered differently, and this can lead people to wrongly mark them as tracks, when legally they are roads. I suspect that people in all-paved and people in zero-paved areas don't see this as important, but I live in a town where some people live on dirt roards, and was recently in an area of Vermont where many roads are not paved, and it's a big deal in route planning. Perhaps now with carto it's just a question of someone sending a patch, but it seems like there has been reluctance to render unpaved roads differently. I don't think that one patch is going to cut it here. What's important to one group of map users in one area is very different to what's useful to another somewhere else. The standard map style is already very fussy in some respects (does path really need a separate rendering from footway et al?), and other maps made with OSM data (including Mapquest's and http://www.openstreetmap.de/karte.html) tend to be a bit less busy. Adding more detail makes it more useful to you but makes it less useful to someone else. For me on foot, legal rights-of-way (designation in England-and-Wales-speak) is what's important, so maps that I create for my own use always incorporate that. You in Vermont would no doubt want something different, just as the German community did, and the HOT / osm-fr people did. If you're prepared to (mis)use existing styling elements from the current map, you don't even have to touch the map style at all - just rewrite the data as it goes into the rendering database (1) (if you're talking about a web map) or edit the mappings in the style file (2) (the equivalent for a Garmin map). If you just want Vermont, then based on the PBF extract size at Geofabrik, you could probably render all the tiles down to a reasonable zoom level and fit it on an SD card on your phone, so a small virtual server set up as per (3) sat on a desktop or laptop PC is more than capable of handling it. Cheers, Andy 1) https://github.com/openstreetmap/osm2pgsql/blob/master/README_lua.md 2) http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mkgmap/help/Custom_styles 3) http://switch2osm.org/loading-osm-data/ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] highway=track access
Sure, I realize I can (with enough spare time) render what I want. The mkgmap style I have does in fact mark dirt roads (by abusing track, as you suggest, which needs fixing), and I'll get around to making osmand show them too. My point was that for almost all map users (in cars or road bikes), knowing if a road is dirt is very important. Having something in the default render means other mappers are more likely to be aware of the paved/not status and fix it. So I really am talking about the default style, not what anyone else can do. As for style, I mean something as simple as dashed casings when unpaved, similar to a lot of exiting road maps. I don't think this adds clutter - there will just be a few pixels missing, and most people will understand it without even looking that the key given usage in other maps. (I can certainly see why the default style wouldn't render lots of things (radio towers, for instance), so I'm not trying to suggest a map-nerd default render.) pgpPSk53hLVCG.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] turning layers off
(not a tagging question really, but) Top tip: Ctrl-W in JOSM (wireframe mode) makes areas show as outlines rather than tinted areas. Dan 2014-06-05 15:50 GMT+01:00 Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl: Yes, in JOSM, you can use the Filters window. -- Matthijs On 5 June 2014 15:46, Tom Gertin tger...@gmail.com wrote: Is it possible to turn visibility of certain layers or feature types off in OpenStreetMap (Id or JOSM), such as features with a landuse tag? I am having a hard time drawing building polygons inside landuse polygons because the landuse polygons have a colored tint to them. Thanks, Tom G. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] turning layers off
2014-06-05 16:46 GMT+02:00 Tom Gertin tger...@gmail.com: Is it possible to turn visibility of certain layers or feature types off in OpenStreetMap (Id or JOSM), such as features with a landuse tag? Alternatively you could change the appearance by customizing the landuse style (e.g. make it more transparent). What also might be useful to know: if you press CTRL while drawing your new nodes won't get integrated into the existing ways / nodes (override snapping). Generally filtering stuff out in the editor is risky because somehow everything is connected (in the sense of has a relation to the rest of the surrounding data). Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] highway=track access
2014-06-05 17:15 GMT+02:00 SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: is something that has the same legal access as an unclassified road (legally it is a road) but physically it's far from it, hence highway=track. my duck-test would go like this: if a road is serving to connect a place (e.g. a hamlet, village) and is used by people going to this place then it is at least unclassified, if instead it is used only by farmers to access their fields, then it is a track. I don't know what the physical appearance of a track is, as I have seen all kinds of them, from perfectly paved with smooth surface to very uneven grass track hardly recognizable. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] turning layers off
Am 05.06.2014 19:10, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: 2014-06-05 16:46 GMT+02:00 Tom Gertin tger...@gmail.com mailto:tger...@gmail.com: Is it possible to turn visibility of certain layers or feature types off in OpenStreetMap (Id or JOSM), such as features with a landuse tag? Alternatively you could change the appearance by customizing the landuse style (e.g. make it more transparent). What also might be useful to know: if you press CTRL while drawing your new nodes won't get integrated into the existing ways / nodes (override snapping). another quick solution for JOSM would be the option to only render the border of areas under map preferences. Generally filtering stuff out in the editor is risky because somehow everything is connected (in the sense of has a relation to the rest of the surrounding data). I admit that you have to be more careful when using filters but they help a lot. Cheers fly ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] highway=track access
2014-06-05 17:25 GMT+02:00 Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com: As for style, I mean something as simple as dashed casings when unpaved, similar to a lot of exiting road maps. I don't think this adds clutter - there will just be a few pixels missing, and most people will understand it without even looking that the key given usage in other maps. What about countries where 90% of roads are unpaved? That's not going to look very nice. The solution could be that the starting OSM page should default to some pretty minimal map, and then one of the optional maps would be this map that is designed for mappers. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [OpenStreetMap] #5163: paths and tracks rendering indistinguishable: your opinion?
On 2014-05-19 18:12, André Pirard wrote : This is about OSM ticket https://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/5163 (obsolete): The rendering of highway=path and highway=track is barely distinguishable. ... In summary, I don't know how many of you appreciate to tag with this result where no tractor or motorbike driver will know which way they can go and where pedestrians will not know where they will quietly walk without meeting drivers... https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/7649889/3034733/29cb8478-e07a-11e3-9366-2b852da13889.jpg ... instead of this looking more like a professional Geographic Institute map, I have explained that ... stockis osm new https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/7649889/3035288/496a45ee-e089-11e3-94c9-71745d7ca5a2.png in detail here https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/547 without being handicapped with file size limits. Especially comparison with IGN. Their first reply below: Any opinions?, encouraging replies. If you have any feelings or ideas about it, including helping Little Red Riding and Robin Hood, you know the address (github, not trac). Original Message Subject: Re: [openstreetmap-carto] paths and tracks renderings are indistinguishable (#547) Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 09:16:30 -0700 From: math1985 notificati...@github.com Any opinions? — Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/547#issuecomment-44669344. Cheers, André. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] highway=track access
On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 22:31 +0200, Janko Mihelić wrote: (Greg) As for style, I mean something as simple as dashed casings when unpaved, What about countries where 90% of roads are unpaved? That's not going to look very nice. Janko, I am sure you don't mean to suggest we should tag the world so some particular maps look nice ? Personally, I think nice maps are accurate, informative ones. Visually appeal is important too but not at the expense of 'informative'. I support Greg's approach. David ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
