Hello,
I have eventually modified the page
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:visibility (and done a french
translation)
Hope it is ok, thanks to all!
On 01/12/2016 20:17, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 1 Dec 2016, at 10:42, Colin Smale wrote:
What would this "vi
sent from a phone
> On 1 Dec 2016, at 10:42, Colin Smale wrote:
>
> What would this "visibility" tag *actually* be used for? Choosing the right
> size of icon on a map? Navigation hints for pilots? Choosing where to stand
> for the best view?
yes
it could help deciding what to show when. F
Given good elevation data and feature height, the "visibility" of tall
structures can surely be calculated geometrically. Factor in the width,
the human-eye factors (angular resolution) and maybe atmospheric
distortion and you are there, in an objective sense. The distance will
be dependent on the
I think it's ok, maybe there's room for another value beyond area, like
'distance' or 'landmark', or maybe 'region', things that are visible from
relatively far away, like from the next village, or from suburbia, like
skyscrapers, tv towers, big towers in general, even smaller towers but atop a
Hello,
Thank you for your comments. I've tried to take them into account at
best. It won't be perfect, but at least it enables to extend the scope
of 'visibility' tag (which was once only for clocks), to other devices.
Moreover by keeping the three existing values ( 'house', 'street',
'area'
[2016-11-29 11:10] Martin Koppenhoefer
> 2016-11-29 7:02 GMT+01:00 markus schnalke :
>
> This is just like the smoothness=* case. Instead of having values
> like ``excellent'', ``bad'' or ``horrible'', we now learned that
> it is better to tag for what cases some smoothness is okay. T
2016-11-29 7:02 GMT+01:00 markus schnalke :
> This is just like the smoothness=* case. Instead of having values
> like ``excellent'', ``bad'' or ``horrible'', we now learned that
> it is better to tag for what cases some smoothness is okay. The
> same here: You'll always need the explanations abov
[2016-11-28 20:50] Paul Desgranges
>
> Visibility and readability are not the same, [...]
They also suggest different meanings, at least to me. When I
first read you message about visibility of public clocks, I
thought it would indicate from which directions or places it
would be visible, not the
I just wanted to extend the meaning of 'visibility' so that it does not
match only the 'clocks' but more things and for example 'advertising'
devices.
As a matter of fact, I find as well that "house"/"street"/"area" are not
very well understandable values for "visibility", but its was the
exi
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 28 nov 2016, alle ore 12:40, Colin Smale ha
> scritto:
>
> Do you mean visibility, or would legibility be better here? Maybe I can see a
> clock from 100m away, but it is not actually useful until it becomes legible
> at 20m.
>
> You use the word "readable" (=
Do you mean visibility, or would legibility be better here? Maybe I can
see a clock from 100m away, but it is not actually useful until it
becomes legible at 20m.
You use the word "readable" (=legible) yourself.
//colin
On 2016-11-28 12:30, Paul Desgranges wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can we extend
11 matches
Mail list logo
