Talk:Map features/Archive 2

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

amenity=school rendering colour

amenity=school is displayed in the page as a light-purple area for ways, whereas mapnik renders them as a pale yellow colour

-- unsigned comment

fixed in 2014. See File:Rendering-area-amenity-school.png#filehistory. (section can be archived) -- Harry Wood (talk) 12:49, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Typo

If someone can figure out how to edit this page, can they remove the b from bevergreen ?

Done. Chrabros (talk) 07:20, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Last changes by Xxzme?

I would like to revert the last change to this (already huge) page done by User:Xxzme withou any previous discussion.

I really do not see any benefit of adding here weird template {{Map Features:animal}}

Also I believe that the templates below were removed previously for a good reason.

In my opinion they should not be here.

Any thoughts?

Chrabros (talk) 11:57, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

I agree that most of them should not be on Map Features, especially things like "animal" (mostly duplicates of tags listed elsewhere or exotic use cases) and "abutters" (that key is no longer used in any significant quantity). There are some where an argument could be made to keep them, but generally we should pay attention to not include every tag ever used on Map Features. --Tordanik 22:31, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Okay, animal contain duplicate tags. But rest are not. These tags used by people aroud the world. If you want to remove them, please clarify why. Is there better schema now? Is this tag deprecated? Xxzme (talk) 15:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Cycleway template is completely duplicated in highway template. Chrabros (talk) 07:52, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Valid point, I missed that. Xxzme (talk) 10:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. If the complaint is that the number of templates differs in some languages that can be fixed.--Andrew (talk) 23:39, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Not only that. Why do you want to remove tags that are in widespread use in OSM? Xxzme (talk) 15:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Because this page should list only major OSM features in widespread use.
It is not written anywhere. This is only your subjective opinion about how big "Map Features" should be.
You are trying to enforce your opinion about how "wiki should look like". Instead of single view enforced by single user, users should compare multiple approaches and pick one for them. Do not remove valid information. Xxzme (talk) 10:39, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
There are at least three of us who thinks that this page was better before and only you keep changing it by adding unnecessary tags. Chrabros (talk) 07:52, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
There at least Russian community where tag surface in widespread use. There at least countless OsmAnd users who use surface and smoothness tags for routing. There dozens of programs that support contact: namespace, including OsmAnd Xxzme (talk) 10:37, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Sure they are, I believe you. But why these tags needs to be shown here on this extra large page? There are more tags widely used which are not here. This page is not meant to contain all tags used in OSM. I would suggest to temove surface and abutters again at least. Chrabros (talk) 14:15, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
If we are looking at the additions separately, these are my opinions:
  • {{Map Features:contact}} The alternatives to the contact tags (e.g. website instead of contact:website) are used a lot more often, so they should be the ones featured here.
  • {{Map Features:abutters}} Abutters has vanished in importance when compared to landuse, which is used 3 orders of magnitude more.
  • {{Map Features:smoothness}} Smoothness tagging always been highly controversial and many mappers refuse not to use it, even if there is a following. I believe that it would be misleading to present it to unsuspecting newbies as if it was established.
So these 3 should be removed imo. I could agree with the inclusion of surface, traffic_calming and information in Map Features, as I would consider these largely established and uncontested. --Tordanik 14:47, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Not simply removed! Users should able to access them easily. Right now it is impossible other than via Map features page. They are present everywhere at wiki, Map features is simply incomplete after you remove them. Before any futher removals we should add cross links to Category:Navigational templatess. abutters should be linked from landuse navbar, contact namespace tags from contacts navbar, smoothness from Template:Highways. Then you can actually remove them from Map features. Xxzme (talk) 15:16, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
The tables are displayed at contact=*, abutters=* and smoothness=*. These pages all have something vital that simple tables lack: an explanation of when you want to use the tags at all without drowning out information for people who want to map other things.--Andrew (talk) 16:45, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
This is because they are Namespaces, not key/tag pages. But it is fine, we will improve this later by expanding them per each tag/key page. User will see links and follow them. But we must show them links to follow at least. See Category:External reference tag - this category should be reimplemented using navbar templates mentioned above. When all links are grouped in navbars they are easy to understand and navigate without reading every single key/tag page - this is huge advantage. Xxzme (talk) 17:15, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Both {{Map Features:abutters}} and {{Map Features:smoothness}} are mentioned in highway template and the tables are shown on their respective pages. So why is it necessary to display them here? Chrabros (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
smoothness is not displayed in Template:Map Features:highway (please use ctrl+f). If there any duplicate information we should fix this and remove used templates if possible. Xxzme (talk) 23:00, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, my mistake, I meant to say that {{Map Features:surface}} is mentioned in Template:Map Features:highway so it could be removed as well. But you can add one line for {{Map Features:smoothness}} in the same way and the size of the whole MapFeatures page would be greatly reduced, no? Chrabros (talk) 07:55, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Yes sure, done. Xxzme (talk) 14:20, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
The same is true for {{Map Features:information}} which is mentioned in tourism template. Chrabros (talk) 12:07, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Okay, there more duplicates. Then should we simple remove these 3 templates, because translators may translate them by mistake. See Category:Map_Features_template Xxzme (talk) 22:31, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Which three templates are you reffering to? It starts to be a bit confusing. And removed them from where? From MapFeatures page? Chrabros (talk) 07:55, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
4 already, they are removed from Map features but their names are confusing for translators (they named "Map features" but they are not used at Map features page itself but at respective Key: pages. This is not obvious when you open Category:Map_Features_template, we should keep this category clean so translators can easily update their Map features pages easily. Xxzme (talk) 14:20, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
{{Map Features:traffic calming}}
Why do we have to include Traffic Calming template when this template itself is not used on the key page in English at all? See traffic_calming=*. Chrabros (talk) 12:40, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
If you ask me, a map feature template shouldn't be in both the key page and in the map features page. Why? Because these pages have conflicting purposes. The Map Features page is supposed to show tags accepted by the community while the page of a key is an attempt to enumerate most values of the key. --Jgpacker (talk) 18:59, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Editor developers might cite this

A pointer to this page would be a wonderful thing to have somewhere in any map editor. Until today, I’ve just hunted (often unsuccessfully) for something similar to imitate. 伟思礼 (talk) 19:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Resolved: improvements to editors should be proposed at their issue trackers or where their authors prefer Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:14, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Political History Map

I was looking everywhere on the web for a map where you can move a bar back and forth and see historical boundaries change, but I couldn't find anything. I don't know how difficult it would be to integrate, but the data is already available. Later on, if the data can be found, perhaps other metadata could be added like city population and we could see cities flare up like stars, or dwindle during the black death. But, even the most basic incorporation of historical borders would be of tremendous value. Does anyone have any idea where to start? --JGould 08:46, 22 October 2011 (BST)

Probably not as much detail as you require but google earth has some historical maps with timeline slider you can access from the menus, fraid it doesn't seem to move the boundaries for you or change the roadmap overlay.

Resolved: Not related to Map features Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Telephone lines and poles

There are set conventions for marking electric power lines and poles.

There are no set conventions for marking telephone lines and poles.

Please make some.

Jidanni (talk) 10:40, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Resolved: This is not a place to invent tagging or ask for help, I would reccomend https://community.openstreetmap.org/ for that @Jidanni: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:25, 28 March 2024 (UTC)


Features when tagged and upload not seen in OpenStreetMap

There are features listed in Map Features page but when tagged and uploaded, are not seen in the OpenStreetMap. The data exists when map data view is enabled but in the standard layer physical existence of the feature cannot be viewed. Example: man_made = kiln tag is an accepted tag and is listed in the Map Features page. I tagged an area with this tag and uploaded to osm but I was not able to see the mapped area but the data were there. There is a suggested rendering as well but I guess it is not implemented yet.Basically, We represent the OSM community in Nepal and we are working on a project which include mapping kiln that produce bricks in our capital city. Pollution especially air pollution has been a main issue for quite some time in Kathmandu. According to Environmental Pollution Index 2014 published by Yale University, Nepal ranked second last after Bangladesh in terms of air quality and its effect to human health http://www.cen.org.np/uploaded/AQ%20Status%20and%20Managment%20in%20KV_Maya%20Factsheet%205.pdf and toxic chemicals such as polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) from combustion in brick kilns and diesel vehicles (MOEST, 2005) adds to it. We need to map the data related to brick kilns and keep it open (upload to osm) for analysis of the data for possible actions. There are 98 users of the tag man_made = kiln according http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/man_made=kiln till October 16 2014.

We want these to be visible in the openstreetmap so what is the procedure to make this feature to be rendered?

  • Each mapping layer available on the map (choose with the “stack of books” icon) maintains its own style sheet with a choice of features to render. The standard layer has its own feature request page.--Andrew (talk) 11:17, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Resolved: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

oneway:bicycle and cycleway=*

The Wiki page does not give any comment on whether to add oneway:bicycle=no on a cycleway=opposite_track or not. On Key:oneway:bicycle I cannot find any explicit statement about whether to add oneway:bicycle=no if it applies to cycleway=opposite_track or cycleway=track.

The actual reason for my question is: I want to tag cycleway:right:oneway=no while the highway=* has oneway=yes. So the question is actually much more related to oneway=* than anything else. So I will ask the question again on the page above and propose to continue the discussion there. Please tell me since the proposed tagging at this page was not intended and there.--U715371 (talk) 19:42, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Because Key:oneway#Sub_keys_.2F_exceptions in fact states what I was asking for, I will add the suggestion to use oneway:bicycle=no to cycleway=opposite_track after March 9th 2015, if there are no further comments.--U715371 (talk) 23:48, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Resolved: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dopposite_track mentions it now Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

No way to click to see examples on the map

So we read about lots of features.

But let's say one wishes to see an example on the map.

No where can one click to see a example of a given feature on the map.

No matter on this page, nor on the individual tag's page.

Nor is there a way mentioned to see all of feature X within Y kilometers of me here at Z.

Jidanni (talk) 20:54, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Resolved: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

What tags get included in this wiki?

I am looking at the tags listed on this wiki for cycleway=* , and see that cycleway=shared is not included, even though CycleStreets uses it to make route recommendations, and Taginfo shows it as the 6th most popular value. What are the criteria used to determine whether a tag should be included here? --One Ironaut (talk) 02:14, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

If you think that this tag is frequently used, then just add it here. Chrabros (talk) 07:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Only established tags should be added here. This means as many as possible of: approved by vote, well documented, mostly uncontested, used in several independent applications, used by a lot of mappers. The exact threshold is somewhat subjective, though.
In your specific example, the "shared" value is said to be "considered obsolete" on Key:cycleway, so that would be a possible reason to not list it here. --Tordanik 08:12, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Resolved: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Map key lacks farmland

Farmland (beige colour) is missing in the map key on http://www.openstreetmap.org. --SelfishSeahorse (talk) 19:31, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Resolved: It should be reported at https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website if that is still not reported problem and it keeps happening Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Map_features/Archive_2&oldid=2688338"