It was just an example. Peak is "close enough" for now, and you can
argue that it works for both mountain and individual peaks. That would
be okay, but the problem with that is that there is no information for
the renderer which peaks that should be shown when zoomed out. Some
renderers just filter out the highest peak (I think opentopomap does
that), which does work in say 80% of the cases, but sometimes the
highest peak has a specific name, and the whole mountain is named
something else.
It's frustrating to see that many OSM folks seems to be "surprised"
about these things, like it would be something super unique maybe only
existing in Sweden. It's not. It's just basic cartography of natural
features all over the world. I was for a while surprised that there's
not more urgency to fix these type of issues, but once I've learnt about
how the community works, I'm no longer as surprised, but it's still
frustrating.
I'm not going to make a wiki entry. I'm just a mapping contributor
within the current framework, not an OSM developer, and I don't intend
to become one. I've done my due diligence of OSM and concluded that its
more about politics than about solving technical problems, and those
things leads to me burning out.
What I can do is contribute to the map. And I do. I'm a quite advanced
mapper, including writing my own custom software tools to be able to map
faster (not automated mapping, but aided manual mapping). When I stumble
across things that I don't know how to map, I ask questions at OSM Help,
and if the answer is not satisfactory there, I turn to here. I'm now
actively involved in the small Swedish OSM community and we discuss how
to best map things within the existing OSM feature set, and I try to
come up with reference methods. I've lately been involved in following
up vandalism. But my engagement ends there, I don't have the capacity to
do more.
If the only way to cater mapper's needs is for those individual mappers
to navigate and penetrate OSM politics to what it has grown to today, I
think we're stuck. I takes a special type of effort and dedication which
few people posses, and unfortunately I'm not one of them. You will
probably hear some rumbling frustration from my mapping efforts from
time to time, but that's it.
/Anders
On 2020-12-13 01:14, stevea wrote:
Anders, I didn't see this until after I sent my reply.
I believe this list here is interested in what you call "missing
features," as a list. I look at them as challenges of ours or
frustrations of yours which can either be explained or solved. You
might not like the explanations.
For example, if you were to expound upon differences between
"mountain" (as Anders, or Sweden understands it) and natural=peak (as
OSM understands it), we're listening. You might be prompted to "make
a proposal for mountain" or "write a wiki for how your first
mountain=whatever or whatever=mountain tag you recently started to
enter (because it is well thought-out, defined, follows sensible rules
about 'what it is' and 'how it is tagged'...)" is now extant, and so
on.
To solve such frustrations doesn't necessarily include this or that
about mountaineering. This is called reducing the map consumer's
perspective, as you simply "tag well and accurately using a syntax
expressing what you mean." If there is no such tagging, we might
support it (as new tagging and/or a new proposal) and maybe someday it
will be rendered. This is (partly) how our map data have grown, it is
how our map data continue to grow.
SteveA
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
