Tagged: arch, cliff, gravel, landuse, natural, osmc:symbol, park, path, residential, rock, rocky, stone, surface, water_tower, waymarks
- AuthorPosts
- November 27, 2017 at 08:54 #21280Interaktiv GrafikaParticipant
Hi,
Yes, ground can cover lot of grounds if it’s used this way for all of the natural surfaces (except the winter stuff). I understand this logic and when the areas under the paths are tagged properly it can provide the necessary information (though for e.g. popular hiking paths eroded to the bedrock in forest areas remain an educated guess in this way). Anyways I interpret the OSM wiki about ground (“No special surface, the ground itself has marks of human or animal usage. This value gives only a rough description; if possible, use a more precise value such as grass, clay, sand, earth, gravel, pebblestone or rock”) kinda differently so I’ll continue to tag path surfaces more directly (when I walk on bedrock, it’s rock, on a grassland it’s grass and so on and I don’t care if it’s natural or man-made 🙂 ) These two viewpoints will co-exist and maybe one day rock will catch up with the other surface values (maybe I should make a wiki page about it?). Anyways thanks for the replies 🙂
Best regards,
IGNovember 27, 2017 at 11:53 #21284TobiasKeymasterOf course more detailed values are possible, as stated in the wiki. But some of those mentioned are also not defined. And the problem will persist – is “rock” or “stone” man made or ground? Maybe it would make sense to introduce ground:rock, ground:stone etc. to get this right. As those would be unpaved, but man made surfaces with rocks or stones would be paved.
Developer of Elevate mapstyle
November 28, 2017 at 22:50 #21319TobiasKeymasterThe „new“ arches work as expected, thanks for your examples. Will be included in next Elevate versions as well.
…and is released now.
Developer of Elevate mapstyle
1 user thanked author for this post.
December 3, 2017 at 11:22 #21438Interaktiv GrafikaParticipantHi,
So as I was browsing my favourite bedtime reading, the tag-mapping table on this site, I felt tremendous joy seeing that wind turbines (power generators) are nicely mapped.
<osm-tag key=’generator:source’ value=’wind’ zoom-appear=’14’ />
Imaginable the shock I was in when I realised that I can’t see them on the actual OAM map with the official Elevate theme or with my poor little one, despite I sought some properly tagged objects visible on OSM or even on Freizetkarte’s Mapsforge distribution. Maybe I’m doing something wrong but I’m heartbroken 🙁
Thanks and best regards,
IGDecember 3, 2017 at 11:35 #21440JohnPercyParticipantWind turbines appear on LoMaps but not on OAMaps. Personally, I think they are such obvious features that they ought to be shown on maps these days.
Voluntary and Velocity themes - https://voluntary.nichesite.org
December 3, 2017 at 14:41 #21444TobiasKeymasterDecember 3, 2017 at 15:15 #21451Interaktiv GrafikaParticipantHi Tobias,
Thanks for checking this out. Then it may be something with the OSM tagging but the strange thing is that the Freizeitkarte map shows the wind turbines but OAM with Elevate doesn’t either in Locus or Orux.
There are only service roads near to the turbines nothing with high priority that would fool Locus’ sorry arse engine (they are standing on landuse=farmland area.) The centre of this area is N 47°40.099′ E 018°04.767′ and the objects seem to be tagged properly (generator:source=wind power=generator) so I’m dazed and confused…
Thanks and best regards,
IGDecember 3, 2017 at 15:39 #21453TobiasKeymasterIs the “special buildings and orientation” overlay active?
Developer of Elevate mapstyle
December 3, 2017 at 15:46 #21455Interaktiv GrafikaParticipantHi,
Of course. All overlays are on except “hiking routes” 😉 What are the coordinates of the area on your screenshot?
Thanks and best regards,
IGDecember 3, 2017 at 15:49 #21457TobiasKeymasterIt’s this one:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/263833043#map=19/48.21413/11.63047Developer of Elevate mapstyle
December 3, 2017 at 16:17 #21461Interaktiv GrafikaParticipantHi,
Ok so I downloaded the “Bayern” map and in Orux with the Elevate theme I can’t see the turbine of your screenshot even when every overlays are off except “special buildings + orientation”… Now I’m really confused.
Thanks and best regards,
IGDecember 3, 2017 at 17:20 #21463TobiasKeymasterHi,
Ok so I downloaded the “Bayern” map and in Orux with the Elevate theme I can’t see the turbine of your screenshot even when every overlays are off except “special buildings + orientation”… Now I’m really confused.Just checked, on my phone I still got the October map, while on the computer the November one – which doesn’t show the turbines either, I also don’t get them in the last Hungary test map Christian made. Strange indeed.
Probably a case for Christian?Developer of Elevate mapstyle
December 3, 2017 at 17:35 #21465JohnPercyParticipantI can confirm that the latest OAMap for Great Britain does not show wind turbines, while the LoMap for England does. The tag-mapping however seems to indicate that wind turbines ought to be mapped.
Voluntary and Velocity themes - https://voluntary.nichesite.org
December 18, 2017 at 20:54 #21691Interaktiv GrafikaParticipantHi,
So last time in this year I promise 🙂 here I am with a question. Now having the waymarking working beautifully with way colouring I bumped into a problem with waymarks containing text instead of graphic foreground. (Actually I bumped into it before the waycolor stuff as it’s independent of it).
So according to the OSM wiki the osmc:symbol syntax isosmc:symbol=waycolor:background[:foreground][[:foreground2]:text:textcolor]
and it seems when there’s no foreground/foreground2 you expect a value like
osmc:symbol=yellow:yellow::S:white
(Alpanonia Zubringer)with an extra : for the missing foreground I guess, and it works nicely displaying a white S on yellow background. However in Hungary the routes with text waymarks (a lot, 200+) are tagged like
osmc:symbol=yellow:white:::MZ:yellow
(Magyar Zarándokút (Esztergom – Budapest – Siklós, Máriagyűd))probably because of the also missing foreground2 part. I think because of the extra : the parsing fails and only the empty background graphic is displayed. Wouldn’t be possible to accommodate this “syntax variation” in the parsing of the osmc:symbol?
Thanks and best regards,
IGDecember 18, 2017 at 22:16 #21698TobiasKeymasterprobably because of the also missing foreground2 part. I think because of the extra : the parsing fails and only the empty background graphic is displayed. Wouldn’t be possible to accommodate this „syntax variation“ in the parsing of the osmc:symbol?
This inconsistent syntax is one of the reasons Christian avoided for a long time to include these tags :-), see also here:
“osmc:foreground = color:background:foreground:foreground2:text:textcolor is not supported (not even as „::“)”
But maybe he can look at it again…
Developer of Elevate mapstyle
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.