Glenn, hebt ge me wel goed gelezen?

There is not the slightest need to convince me we should not map for the renderer. There's a bunch of mappers, especially in France but also one in Italy, who vehemently remove the "aeroway=aerodrome" tag from small airfields. When I reinstate it, they will promptly remove it and send me angry messages.


I do not say they are right, I do say there is some reason to their approach. It is not acceptable that the renderer knows only one category of aerodrome so that it maps a small recreational aerodrome the same way as an international airport. This should be improved in the renderer, both to satisfy those Southern grumblers even if they're not right; but mainly to improve the map that we produce.

It is not because they are wrong in France that there is no room for improving the renderer. Whence my repeated question: where or with whom can this be discussed?

KA

PS one thing I have begun to do is to tag those small fields as "aeroway=airstrip" but that is not to everybody's liking, either.


On 22/02/18 09:41, Glenn Plas wrote:
Mapping for the renderer is de facto wrong and what you experience now
(in france etc.) is the endresult of that attitude.  I don't understand
why you get discouraged on OSM because of a map you don't like.   It's
like saying:  "I don't contribute to Wikipedia anymore because when I
print a page out, it's not aligned the way I want it."

There are several options for anyone in your situation:

1. make your own map.  There are several sites that allow you to make
custom maps.
2. more technical: copy cartoCSS, change whatever you want, set up a
tile server and enjoy your perfectly suited map
3. try to change the consensus, lobby for universal solution, try to get
the standard cartoCSS changed to your likings (and repeat later when
someone else does the same)
4. Look for existing map alternatives  (different renderings)

You should realise that it has nothing to do with the source data.
There are already ton's of different map rendering out there, perhaps
one will be perfect for you.

Don't stop mapping because of someone elses decision to represent a
feature in a way that doesn't appeal to you.  It's the worst reason to
stop as that might just change in an instant.

Glenn


On 19-01-18 16:43, Karel Adams wrote:
When I first consulted maps - paper-only, at that time, of course -
the famous Michelin 1:200000 had distinct symbols for (bigger)
airports, (smaller) airfields, and glider fields. As of 2018, the
generic map of openstreetmap has only a single icon to represent
anything mapped with "aeroway:aerodrome" - and all of them rendered as
from zoomlevel=13 - and none below.

This is really very bad. Why should I want to contribute to a system
that delivers poorer info than paper maps of 50 years old?

Even worse, many active and able mappers are reluctant to update the
database properly because the correct info will be so poorly rendered.
Especially in France and Italy, where I had endless arguments with
people removing the "aeroway=aerodrome" tag from real proper
aerodromes, because they didn't want their local grass runway mapped
the same as CDG Roissy airport. Even if I don't agree, I can fully
understand their point of view!

What is the proper place to question this matter, and discuss schemes
of improvement? Is there a discussion site for the renderer?




_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be




_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Reply via email to