Nov 6, 2020, 19:31 by and...@torger.se: > Hello everyone, newcomer here! > > I've been a casual contributing mapper for a couple of years here in Sweden. > Only since 2018 :-O, I thought it was longer, and during this time I've made > 1700 edits mostly using iD, just started using JOSM for some more complex > edits. Anyway, I recently tried to up my game to make really high quality and > "complete" maps in the areas I live. > Hello! This type "lets completely do XYZ" tends to reveal unfinished/missing/problematic parts. I hope that my answers will explain a bit situation and at least partially answer your questions. > I'm not 100% sure if this mailing list is the right venue for discussing > these issues. > It sounds that most of that is about tagging so I would say "yes" > ** Tagging and naming areas on ground does not seem to be developed much at > all, unfortunately. > > ** There is natural=peninsula so one can tag and name an area of varying > size, but it doesn't seem to render (unless I've made some mistake...) > With less than 1000 mapped lack of support is not surprising. Not sure is there a better tag/way to map this. If not, then simply mapping more of them is a good idea. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=peninsula > ** I can't make an area to name hills or slopes, which is very common around > here (natural=hill would be nice and is more generic than slope). There's > peak, but that's only for point for the highest peak with elevation, so it > doesn't the purpose here. > Using natural=peak for hill should be fine. For slopes: is it name for part of slope? Farmland area on it? Entire hill? Something else? I used for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/259975428 - I was lucky as name applies just to farmland area. > ** Valleys can only be tagged as ways, but here it would make much more sense > to make an area, as sizes of these valleys vary a lot, and the renderer need > to know how large this is (not just how long) to make sane renders. > You can tag valleys as areas. Are you maybe using iD (in-browser editor)? Note that iD has its own presets suitable for newbies, but it is perfectly fine to use tagging schemes not included in iD. (note: some people have developed strong opinions how bays, valleys etc should be tagged) > > ** Due to limitations in area-based name tagging the map looks empty just > when zoomed out a little, as names disappear almost directly, so despite > detailed mapping and tagging the overview map is not as useful as it could > be. > Note that it depends on a renderer. It is possible to make smarter that will keep names for longer if possible. > > While the renderer can and does make proper decisions of prominence for bays > and strait made as areas, point-based natural names often yield strange and > misleading maps as vastly different sized areas have just a point for the > name and no other differentiator, there's no way the renderer can make an > appropriate render decision as the data is not there. > What specific you have in mind? I admit that for example for peaks rendering is often poor, but data for local importance (elevation) is there. But making automatic smart renderer is tricky at best. > ** Support for group naming is limited. It's here very common that several > smaller islands are named as a group, smaller ponds are named as a group etc, > without having individual names. There are tags for that (group/cluster), but > not rendered. > Mostly because multipolygons are strictly superior. > The best alternative today is to make it a named multipolygon, but only few > renderers make the expected result, ie one name rather than only in one > subarea or duplicated in all areas (which looks strange as the name is often > in plural form, or it doesn't show up at all if each subarea is small). > This is basically on the renderer side, I am unsure what can be improved here on data side. > ** Another fairly common group naming concept is when each feature has its > own name, but the group of features have also a separate collective name. > Maps supporting this concept will thus when you zoom out not show the > individual names but only the group name. The group/cluster tag would perhaps > be the way to do this, but as far as I know no current style supports it. > Yes, this one is unsolved. > ** As a minor note, I've noted there is no good tag for anonymous gravel > yards, which there are a lot of here. Abandoned quarry is the closest, but > still not right, as only some actually were gravel/sand pits to start with. > Those gravel yards are often leftovers from construction work or forestry > often even locals don't exactly know when or why they were made. Today they > are used mainly used for parking by people being out in nature, but they are > not maintained so they are not exactly parking lots either. > I would make a new separate thread for that and link some pictures because many people are completely unfamiliar with such pictures. I just want to say that I think that amenity=parking can be used if area is commonly used for parking and parking is legal there, even if it was not developed as some paved parking lot. > Maybe it's technically difficult to implement. > That is the biggest problem. Automatic smart label placement is awfully hard. See https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/search?q=label&type=issues See for example https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4241 ("Norge label rendered on svalbard instead of mainland") for what kind of issues are happening for seemingly easy cases. For cases that are actually very complex... > Maybe it's technically difficult to make any new things at all as the > database has grown. Maybe it's hard to get acceptance for new features as the > community has grown large and diverse. > That is sometimes a problem, but not main blocker in this case. > Maybe OSM is not intended for mapping natural features. > Not a problem, mapping natural features IS in scope. > Maybe the ability to show anything useful other than maximally zoomed in > isn't a priority. > It is kind of reduced in importance for some data consumers as zooming in is possible, so showing everything in a given view is less important than for paper maps. > Maybe rural areas isn't important to OSM. > "important to OSM" is tricky, as OSM in without some top-down leadership. But rural areas tend are in scope of OSM.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
