Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #21395
    JohnPercy
    JohnPercy
    Participant

    Interesting developments with peaks and passes, thanks.
    Trying this out makes me ask whether the “yes” in mountain_pass=”yes” should be transformed in the mapping to a unique value such as “pass_yes” like other instances of “yes”?
    Also, a little disappointed in the height ranges of the mountains. Fine for the Alps, but not so useful in the UK. I count only ten mountains in the next-to-lowest category and all the rest in the lowest category.

    #21397
    ChristianK
    ChristianK
    Keymaster

    Trying this out makes me ask whether the „yes“ in mountain_pass=“yes“ should be transformed in the mapping to a unique value

    Yes, should be done.
    However, its probably the last artefact of first tagmapping – so IMO this will couse no errors.

    I count only ten mountains in the next-to-lowest category and all the rest in the lowest category.

    For Scotland there are [peaks / distance_group]
    40 in pd_1
    174 in pd_2
    354 in pd_3
    3848 in pd_4
    4140 in pd_5

    So (eg) Ben Moore Assynt, Sgurr Alasdair,.. appear at ZL.9
    Ben Hope, Ben Nevis at ZL.10

    Well, its not really easy to judge which peak ist “important” and which not, the “distance” approach is easy to handle and the results are IMO OK.

    BTW: In GB the situation concerning “importance” of peaks is a little bit different compared to other countrys as there is the munro/corbet scale. It might be an Idea to “upscale” pd_# values for munros at least to (lets say) pd_2 ???
    Is the tagging for the munro=yes done for 100% of all munro/peaks or should this be calculated upon the elevation of the peaks? (where hopefully all elevations are tagged in usefull way)

    Best regards
    Christian

    EDIT: Just seen that not every peak >3000ft is a “real” munro – so we rely on the munro_tag….

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by ChristianK ChristianK.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by ChristianK ChristianK.
    Attachments:
    1. peaks_saddles.zip
    #21401
    ChristianK
    ChristianK
    Keymaster

    There are 282 peaks in Scotland tagged as munro=yes
    there are 282 “official” munros.

    So a rule for tagtransform to upgrade munroes to pd_2 should work.

    Open for discussion ;-)

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by ChristianK ChristianK.
    #21405
    Tobias
    Tobias
    Moderator

    Trying this out makes me ask whether the „yes“ in mountain_pass=“yes“ should be transformed in the mapping to a unique value

    Yes, should be done.
    However, its probably the last artefact of first tagmapping – so IMO this will couse no errors.

    There are still others like tunnel=yes, area=yes, maybe more, I think we left them for compatibility reasons.

    Also, a little disappointed in the height ranges of the mountains. Fine for the Alps, but not so useful in the UK. I count only ten mountains in the next-to-lowest category and all the rest in the lowest category.

    Strange, cause dominance is independent of how high the peak is, it’s a relative value. So a 500m peak can be pd_1, if all others around him in an area of 100km are just 499m high. But all the others, if there is less distance than 1200m between them, are all pd_5.
    The five categories are thought to be:
    pd_1/ZL9 – the most famous peaks, often of (inter)national importance
    pd_2/ZL10 – main peaks of whole mountain ranges
    pd_3/ZL11 – main peaks of whole massifs
    pd4/ZL12 – lesser dominant peaks
    pd5 – everything else

    Developer of Elevate mapstyle

    #21407
    Tobias
    Tobias
    Moderator

    There are 282 peaks in Scotland tagged as munro=yes
    there are 282 „official“ munros.

    So a rule for tagtransform to upgrade munroes to pd_2 should work.

    Open for discussion ;-)

    pd_2 might work, as most are probably in pd_1 or pd_2. Depends of course on a test, if it works on the zoom levels or gets crowded again.

    BTW, the UK maps are still without pd_x values, aren’t they?

    Developer of Elevate mapstyle

    #21409
    ChristianK
    ChristianK
    Keymaster

    BTW, the UK maps are still without pd_x values, aren’t they?

    GreatBritain and UK_Scotland already contain pd_#

    #21411
    ChristianK
    ChristianK
    Keymaster

    Lets give it a try

    [/crayon]

    UK_Scotland with latest mapping should be available this weekend.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by ChristianK ChristianK.
    1 user thanked author for this post.
    #21414
    Tobias
    Tobias
    Moderator

    GreatBritain and UK_Scotland already contain pd_#

    Quick check with UK_Scotland and latest Elevate shows that it works there as well. A bit less dominant peaks than in the central alps in direct comparison, but probably because there are less peaks (or less named peaks) in general.

    Developer of Elevate mapstyle

    #21416
    JohnPercy
    JohnPercy
    Participant

    I misunderstood the basis for assigning categories, and thought it was based on height in metres (and distance was a bad translation!)

    Distance assignet to distance_groups:
    pd_1 >=25000
    pd_2 >=9000
    pd_3 >=5000
    pd_4 >=1200
    pd_5 <1199

    It all makes sense now!

    3 users thanked author for this post.
    #21427
    JohnPercy
    JohnPercy
    Participant

    I don’t know if this behaviour is connected with this feature at all but with the new maps for Great Britain and for Scotland and using Elevate or Voluntary theme on Locus, I am getting a house number for many if not all peaks!
    I’ve checked the themes and it is the house number test that is producing the extraneous number, 13785 in this case. I can’t find any relevant tags in the OSM data.

    Screenshot_2017-12-02-14-39-06
    Theme: Elevate on Locus, map location: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/258829862

    I don’t seem to get the same effect with Cruiser but I’ve not tested it extensively.

    #21434
    ChristianK
    ChristianK
    Keymaster

    hi John,

    I assigned the calculated distance to addr:housenumber for debugging and testing to the peaks.

    1 user thanked author for this post.
    #21436
    JohnPercy
    JohnPercy
    Participant

    So is that a temporary situation? Or do I need to change the test for house numbers?

    #21442
    ChristianK
    ChristianK
    Keymaster

    Yes its a temporary situation. I will disable this in the 2018 tagmapping once everyone is satisfied with the grouping of the distance values for the peaks.

    However, I hope you don’t display addr:housenumber unconditional for every object in the tagmapping cause the current mapset includes the raw distance mapped to addr:h… for all maps….

    #21448
    Tobias
    Tobias
    Moderator

    I don’t know if this behaviour is connected with this feature at all but with the new maps for Great Britain and for Scotland and using Elevate or Voluntary theme on Locus, I am getting a house number for many if not all peaks!

    I don’t seem to get the same effect with Cruiser but I’ve not tested it extensively

    Great find! That’s an effect of missing priorities and bad working elemination algorithm (three items in one place) in the LoMaps Engine, so Cruiser would only display it with landscape features unchecked. And you have to zoom in quite a lot :-) – so I didn’t test with Locus quite as much as with other apps.

    However, I hope you don’t display addr:housenumber unconditional for every object in the tagmapping cause the current mapset includes the raw distance mapped to addr:h… for all maps….

    Displaying it unconditional is probably the norm, as there are tons of nodes which are only a housenumber. Only the OAM tag_transform for some tags (because of mapsforge limitations) make it necsessary. But it reality it’s pretty rare, but I’ll have to add some more conditions so that it doesn’t occur even then.

    Developer of Elevate mapstyle

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 11 months ago by Tobias Tobias.
    #21459
    ChristianK
    ChristianK
    Keymaster

    Displaying it unconditional is probably the norm

    My foult, mea culpa…
    I will re-render European maps…..

    Unfortunately most maps are on the transfer-server so for a few days addr:## will be shown on the peaks.

    Sorry…

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.