Leonardo, per favore non fermarti con i commenti, anche se sono tanti. Se > preferisci, fai un commento generale sulla qualità, indicando i casi > eclatanti di icone che non sono chiare. >
Il commento generale l'ho già fatto. > > Il feedback iniziale della comunità italiana è stato scelto solo perché > Markuss sta ancora ottimizzando la procedura di review e si voleva iniziare > semplicemente da una wiki. Sarebbe controproducente mostrare questo lavoro > se la struttura necessaria per commentarla fosse troppo "traballante". > Anche se non ho capito perché si procede con questo prima in Italia, ... Prima cosa che propongo, è di riorganizzare la lista in tal modo che icone della stessa categoria siano raggruppati (mi sono trovato di commentare su un pittogramma, e poi ho trovato lo stesso pittogramma utilizzato per un altro tipo di POI della stessa categoria più avanti. Mi sembra di capire che la numerazione dei pittogrammi è sistematica e gerarchica. Allora, prima di tutto mettete la lista in rete in ordine di questi numeri. > > È naturale che il lavoro sarà esposto al commento internazionale, > altrimenti come potrebbe essere anche solo preso in considerazione per il > sito osm.org? > Meno male, ma quest'affermazione sul sito sembravo molto strano. > > Aspettiamo i tuoi commenti! > Ecco i primi 20%: ===================================== 19001: If 23001 is used for an military airfield the symbol 19001 should only be used for civil airport (see 11001) The symbol for an historic aircraft needs to be different, maybe a biplane symbol could do the trick 23002: impossible to understand 25002: difficult to recognise 34001: put a ship in the bathtub, otherwise impossible to recognise 25003: impossible to understand 16003: change the form of the hive 27003: why not use the "railway crossing" European road sign (see 27007) 35000: looks like a camp site for homosexuals :-) 23003: impossible to understand 32003: replace the man by a bus (as in 32001) 16005: misleading, use 34003 instead 29007: misleading - I only see wine bottles in the pictogram 21002: looks like an emergency exit 27005: difficult to recognise 29010: looks like the sign of a calligrapher. This is not a pictogram. Put some clothes on it, but not a letter 21004: repair the binoculars (connect the two parts) 29025: difficult to recognise 26001: impossible to understand. Needs to have the electricity symbol added 22003: looks like an eye. Why not use a light-tower symbol? 22006: the tag man_made=campanile documented in the wiki but is used only 130 times. It looks that the tag is wrong as it refers to the Swedish Klockstapel which is completely different from a "campanile". The normal tagging for a campanile is man_made=tower + tower:type= bell_tower should be covered by the same pictogram. (it's "official" and used more then 5000 times). The pictogram is misleading, as a campanile is much higher than the bell-frame shown in the pictogram (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_tower; https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campanile) (I will raise this point in the Tagging mailing list) 13004: impossible to understand. Why not use the "customs" road sign ( https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BSicon_GRENZE_legende.svg) 24003: misleading; I see a mountain, but not a glacier here 22008: misleading; this is a cooling tower, not a chimney 13006: impossible to understand 35001: misleading; looks like a camp site with a bar (strange antenna) 19005: misleading; looks like a historic British phone box. Unrecognisable as a historic building 26004: missing electricity symbol. Unrecognisable without that. 19006: use a side view instead ( http://4vector.com/free-vector/cannon-clip-art-110239) 19008: misleading; historic=church is a former church, no longer in use. The pictogram does not imply this. 19010: historic=farm is a former farm, no longer in use. The pictogram does not imply this. Anyway, even for a working farm, it is not very clear 19020: misleading;looks like a city wall tower, not like a fort 13007: misleading; looks like a zebra crossing (seen from the pedestrian point of view) 13008: difficult to understand without something where the chani is fixed to 13010: misleading; looks like a road bump 26005: this is a cooling tower, not a power generator (which could be also a wind power generator 26008: why does this one not have a cooling tower? Generally for power generators: I would add the output type of power, i.e. in most cases electricity 26021: why not use the cooling tower symbol as for the biogas generator 22009: clear-cut shut not be mapped anyway, as it does not last. The pictogram does not show a clear-cut, but suggests dead trees 25007: misleading. For me this is a money lender or a lawyer 18007: misleading. There should *not* be a separate symbol for mini- (i.e. traversable) and "normal" (i.e. non traversable) roundabouts. 27023: difficult to understand 24007: in principle useful, but corresponds to an abandoned tag proposal ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Trees) even though it's in use ================================================== Volker
_______________________________________________ Talk-it mailing list Talk-it@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
