Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[John Eldredge]

I agree that blue is the logical color for mapping waterways, and should be 
reserved for that purpose.


--
John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot 
drive out hate; only love can do that." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.




On August 22, 2015 5:11:10 AM Daniel Koć  wrote:


W dniu 22.08.2015 1:47, Richard Mann napisał(a):

I'd be tempted to leave motorways as blue - it's not such a critical
problem as the invisible green trunk roads. Adding one


For me the problem is the same - blue looks like a river and I don't
know why at least some of UK-ers likes to see the London area roads like
this (I mean: having to spot two most important road types!):

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=9/51.3289/-0.0673

Its not that "UK style" doesn't work for the rest of the world, it also
doesn't work for UK on OSM, because we have much more data visible than
other maps.

That's not against this or any other local styling - I never
underestimate the power of old habits and I'd like the people to have
what they want on the output, no matter why they want it, but it's just
not going to happen as long as default style has a mission to be
universal.

--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags
down" [A. Cohen]

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk




___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Lester Caine]

On 23/08/15 00:12, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> Only a lack of people willing to do the work.
> A lack of people willing to do the work *and* host the style. We'll
> happily include them if they meet the criteria you mention, but we're
> not currently set up to serve multiple styles ourselves.
> 
> We might be able to switch to vector tiles somewhere down the line,
> allowing us to serve more styles easily, but that requires a lot of
> people willing to do a lot of work ;)

I can't believe that I am the only person who is stuck in a sort of
no-mans land in relation to OSM. Time is a commodity that is in short
supply for many of us, so ideally we want to make the best use of it.
What I would prefer to be  spending time on IS adding data and while
I've a growing backlog of material which I should like to add, much of
that relates to historic development of the current data, so CURRENTLY I
do not have a crib sheet to follow to add material which substantially
relates to current object, but includes elements which may come under
the classification 'abandoned railways'. The sections of railway
information are only a part of the historic element and includes other
objects which are currently being adapted or replaced, and I currently
don't see ANY point in migrating random pieces of history to OHM, when
the bulk of the context is still on OSM. I can be confident that the
material is buried in the change log, but that does not make it usable
for rendering, and THAT is the problem here. Just as people can omit
'abandoned railway' tag from their own rendering, 'old road or old
building' should also be selectable ... and in my book, all that is
missing currently is correct rending of 'start_date' and 'end_date' in
conjunction with the historic material such as 'abandoned railway'.

Yes I know that end_date is a crude structure as is start_date, but
currently they are all that exists to provide a chronology of when
objects appeared on the map and in what form. That a base map would only
contain object with a current valid start_date and end_date allows new
development to be mapped but not yet displayed, and the evolution to
that new development still to be maintained in the database. This is
more about CURRENT history than adding past events but a solution should
cover both.

Up until now while the differences between the rendering in various
tools was irritating, it was reasonably manageable. I don't see that the
current planned change will be reflected in all the tools quickly? And
more of a problem, if some tools follow 'old' practices then things will
be even more confusing for newcomers?

Now I am TRYING to get my head around all of the extra stuff I need to
provide a private rendering system and I've just had to do a hard reboot
of the server as it froze trying to render a sample picture of where
I've got to, so I need something a bit more stable before I can use it
in the open. Even with an 8 core processor and 32Gb ram it's struggling
with a small extract, but then the UK slice does have a larger volume of
data for the area?

http://lsces.co.uk/storage/attachments/71/2071/osm-lsces-z11.png should
explain partially where I've got to. Shields on the road numbers seem to
be inconsistent. Need a few less on some roads, and actually include
some on others. The other problem is as you should be able to see the
main traffic routs are on secondary roads (yellow here), but a number of
key roads are actually tertiary or unclassified and I think I need to
actually re-tag them so that the gaps in the routing grid are properly
represented. Of cause the hill structure would go to explain a few gaps
in that grid ...

I'm trying to get self sufficient, but that is simply not an easy job
with so many different tools used in the background!

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 08/23/2015 12:51 AM, Paul Norman wrote:
>> Could anybody with technical background in the inner OSM workings tell
>> us what is holding us back with introducing new styles (be it raster
>> styles, additional/interactive layers or even vector tiles)?
> 
> Only a lack of people willing to do the work.

A lack of people willing to do the work *and* host the style. We'll
happily include them if they meet the criteria you mention, but we're
not currently set up to serve multiple styles ourselves.

We might be able to switch to vector tiles somewhere down the line,
allowing us to serve more styles easily, but that requires a lot of
people willing to do a lot of work ;)

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Paul Norman]

On 8/22/2015 4:20 AM, Daniel Koć wrote:
Could anybody with technical background in the inner OSM workings tell 
us what is holding us back with introducing new styles (be it raster 
styles, additional/interactive layers or even vector tiles)?


Only a lack of people willing to do the work.

Multiple people have started their own styles based on OpenStreetMap 
Carto. Both the French style and the new German style started this way. 
I believe both the cycle map and transport map on osm.org are using 
vector tile infrastructure now. OpenSeaMap provides a rendered overlay.


If you're asking about on osm.org, I believe there's just been a lack of 
interest. To be added a layer would need to support the criteria on 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Strategic_working_group/New_Tile_Layer_Guidelines. 
I believe the last request was the HOT layer, which got added.


If another tile host wanted to write a proposal to add their tiles, I'd 
be willing to talk to them about helping. I still have all the HOT 
stuff, so wouldn't need to redo that.


For new layers which are overlays or in-client vector tile rendered, 
there would also probably be a pull request needed to add the necessary 
code.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Lester Caine]

On 22/08/15 19:24, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Lester Caine  > wrote:
> 
> The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK web
> services [...]
> 
> I agree that this is a problem. But not for the reasons you may think.
> The OSM default tileset is *not* meant to be used as a general-purpose
> tileset by third parties. There are no service-level guarantees and
> styles may change without notice to them. There is *absoutely* no
> obligation on the OSM community to notify third party users of our
> tilesets of any changes.
> 
> In fact, third parties who consume too much tile bandwidth are
> encouraged to source tiles from other services like MapQuest or Mapbox,
> or roll out their own tile service.
> 
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tile_usage_policy

We have had this discussion before ... If the share link is not intended
to provide links for embedded maps and include a link back to the main
map then it should be removed? This is intended as advertising and using
it as an alternative to google SHOULD be encouraged. But if promoting
OSM is against the rules then so be it ... but advertising some other
commercial service is equally wrong.

As for simply dumping a complete rework of the style without any warning
... that is perhaps why I am looking to retain the current style via my
own service. At least a few 'dictatorships' are learning that one needs
to ease existing users from one style of working to another and allow
the user the choice. In a few places I still get hassled to use 'the new
interface', but there is nothing wrong with the old one and it works for
me. AT least when the front page style changed there was an alternative,
and I think that is how any major change should be handled. If it falls
flat on it's face one can at least roll back rather than having no such
security.

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 08/22/2015 02:12 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> But more importantly, it discounts all those voices who favour the
> status quo. Personally, I think that the problems with the current style
> are relatively minor, and don't automatically justify a drastic change.

But then again, the problems with the new style are also relatively
minor, and don't automatically justify derailing the process ;)

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Lester Caine  wrote:

> The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK web
> services [...]
>

I agree that this is a problem. But not for the reasons you may think. The
OSM default tileset is *not* meant to be used as a general-purpose tileset
by third parties. There are no service-level guarantees and styles may
change without notice to them. There is *absoutely* no obligation on the
OSM community to notify third party users of our tilesets of any changes.

In fact, third parties who consume too much tile bandwidth are encouraged
to source tiles from other services like MapQuest or Mapbox, or roll out
their own tile service.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tile_usage_policy
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Lester Caine]

On 22/08/15 15:08, Philip Barnes wrote:
>> Why not keeping the UK style under openstreetmap.co.uk just like you
>> > will find the german style under openstreetmap.de ?
> It should be openstreetmap.org.uk.
> 
> We are not a commercial organisation.

.co.uk is registered, so the .uk one can be used going forward

But this is possibly not the best way of making a scale able system. It
would be better to have a single main domain which then forwards to an
appropriate service?

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Philip Barnes]

On Sat, 2015-08-22 at 21:39 +0900, Max wrote:
> On 2015년 08월 22일 19:23, Lester Caine wrote:
> > The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK
> > web
> > services, and any change needs to be managed in such a manor that
> > those
> > services are not too badly affected. We do not have a list of every
> > site
> > actually using OSM over google, and the vast majority of users will
> > not
> > be following this list, so some other notification process needs
> > adopting ... and an alternative source needs to be in place for
> > those
> > users ...
> 
> Why not keeping the UK style under openstreetmap.co.uk just like you
> will find the german style under openstreetmap.de ?

It should be openstreetmap.org.uk.

We are not a commercial organisation.

Phil (trigpoint)

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 22.08.2015 14:21, Tom MacWright napisał(a):

On the topic of whether we can or should notify everyone who may
potentially be affected by this change so their opinions can be
registered, you may enjoy this read:


http://www.ftrain.com/wwic.html [2]


Awesome! It's just about what I would like to say (without using 
"customer" metaphor however =} but with "communication" idea instead):


"Create a service experience around what you publish and sell. Whatever 
“customer service” means when it comes to books and authors, figure it 
out and do it. Do it in partnership with your readers. Turn your readers 
into members. Not visitors, not subscribers; you want members. And then 
don't just consult them, but give them tools to consult amongst 
themselves."


We need communications channels for individuals/institutions/services 
using OSM data or other services (especially maps) - and also inside the 
project, because we are so distributed, that for example even Wiki is 
rather a service for rendering team than a common working space, because 
rendering does not try to change it, but rather consumes the definitions 
for its own purposes.


--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Max]

On 2015년 08월 22일 19:23, Lester Caine wrote:
> The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK web
> services, and any change needs to be managed in such a manor that those
> services are not too badly affected. We do not have a list of every site
> actually using OSM over google, and the vast majority of users will not
> be following this list, so some other notification process needs
> adopting ... and an alternative source needs to be in place for those
> users ...

Why not keeping the UK style under openstreetmap.co.uk just like you
will find the german style under openstreetmap.de ?


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Tom MacWright]

On the topic of whether we can or should notify everyone who may
potentially be affected by this change so their opinions can be registered,
you may enjoy this read:

> http://www.ftrain.com/wwic.html

On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 8:12 AM, Tobias Knerr  wrote:

> On 20.08.2015 10:09, Christoph Hormann wrote
> > If you think a different styling than what is currently proposed would
> > be better it would be best to show it.
>
> It's hardly fair to expect critics of the suggested new style to easily
> come up with alternatives. For one, the effort in question was enabled
> by sponsorship by Google, and took place over several months. This is
> not easily duplicated by those favouring other ideas.
>
> But more importantly, it discounts all those voices who favour the
> status quo. Personally, I think that the problems with the current style
> are relatively minor, and don't automatically justify a drastic change.
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Tobias Knerr]

On 20.08.2015 10:09, Christoph Hormann wrote
> If you think a different styling than what is currently proposed would 
> be better it would be best to show it.

It's hardly fair to expect critics of the suggested new style to easily
come up with alternatives. For one, the effort in question was enabled
by sponsorship by Google, and took place over several months. This is
not easily duplicated by those favouring other ideas.

But more importantly, it discounts all those voices who favour the
status quo. Personally, I think that the problems with the current style
are relatively minor, and don't automatically justify a drastic change.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 22.08.2015 12:34, Lester Caine napisał(a):


the motorway still stands out clearly against the water courses. The


So we just disagree here: for me it's just barely "spottable", which is 
far from clear difference, as you see it.



That more styles are required is a simple fact. The problem is allowing
access to an appropriate style rather than the current single option
provided by the main page. We need to be able to select style AND
language defaults in much the same way that projects like php provide
multiple mirrors with local translations and information.


I guess this might be primary a problem of limited resources.

Could anybody with technical background in the inner OSM workings tell 
us what is holding us back with introducing new styles (be it raster 
styles, additional/interactive layers or even vector tiles)?


--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 22.08.2015 12:23, Lester Caine napisał(a):


The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK web
services, and any change needs to be managed in such a manor that those
services are not too badly affected. We do not have a list of every 
site

actually using OSM over google, and the vast majority of users will not
be following this list, so some other notification process needs
adopting ... and an alternative source needs to be in place for those
users ...


If we take a look from 10,000 feet, this is just a specific 
manifestation of a more general problem: up to this moment OSM is 
developing mostly by adding elements (more users, more data, more tags, 
more visual features, wider ecosystem etc.) and has no procedures for 
dealing with more systematic changes.


It's the same when debating any tagging shift or introducing new tagging 
scheme - there are no established channels of communication with the 
whole ecosystem, nor even inside the project!


In my opinion this lack of tools for managing any bigger changes (which 
in turn might be also lack of leadership, I guess) is the main factor 
behind the project being so constricted: it travels very fast, but only 
in one direction, because any try of steering shows so many hidden 
strings attached, that it causes a lot of friction and looks like 
mission impossible.


--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Lester Caine]

On 22/08/15 11:10, Daniel Koć wrote:
>> I'd be tempted to leave motorways as blue - it's not such a critical
>> problem as the invisible green trunk roads. Adding one
> 
> For me the problem is the same - blue looks like a river and I don't
> know why at least some of UK-ers likes to see the London area roads like
> this (I mean: having to spot two most important road types!):
> 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=9/51.3289/-0.0673
> 
> Its not that "UK style" doesn't work for the rest of the world, it also
> doesn't work for UK on OSM, because we have much more data visible than
> other maps.

The switch to more pastel colours WAS the problem here, but the blue of
the motorway still stands out clearly against the water courses. The
only current problem is actually the B roads being lost against the
'farmland' but that is simple to fix - just switch off 'farmland' since
the vast majority of areas not identified are farmland anyway. The loss
of visibility of these in preference to the miss coloured yellow
unclassified roads is the current problem on UK views.

> That's not against this or any other local styling - I never
> underestimate the power of old habits and I'd like the people to have
> what they want on the output, no matter why they want it, but it's just
> not going to happen as long as default style has a mission to be universal.

That more styles are required is a simple fact. The problem is allowing
access to an appropriate style rather than the current single option
provided by the main page. We need to be able to select style AND
language defaults in much the same way that projects like php provide
multiple mirrors with local translations and information.

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 22.08.2015 12:14, Richard Mann napisał(a):

Purple motorways would be a problem in the Severn Estuary:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=11/51.5850/-2.6402 [3]


Sure, but we have more space for changing the boundaries - for example 
use more dashed lines or make them thinner on lower zoom levels. Here 
you can see the same place with a border styling which would be 
different enough:


http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/51.5964/-2.6682

--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Lester Caine]

On 20/08/15 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
> The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue
> for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision
> was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours
> "upwards" so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the
> colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.

Just thought I'd highlight the sort of WTF problems that will need to be
addressed if the main style sheet does change ...

http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Pease_Pottage_Interchange
YES the green on the map is a problem, ...it should be the same colour
as on the left then it will stand out, and the blue and red should also
be darker which I'm currently tinkering with on my own server.

The main problem here is that OSM is used by a large part of the UK web
services, and any change needs to be managed in such a manor that those
services are not too badly affected. We do not have a list of every site
actually using OSM over google, and the vast majority of users will not
be following this list, so some other notification process needs
adopting ... and an alternative source needs to be in place for those
users ...

I've finally got a caching setup working, but it's still not ideal. I'm
still missing something on getting a clean rendering stack that can also
allow additional rendering options to be developed.

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Richard Mann]

Purple motorways would be a problem in the Severn Estuary:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=11/51.5850/-2.6402

On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Daniel Koć  wrote:

> W dniu 22.08.2015 1:47, Richard Mann napisał(a):
>
>> I'd be tempted to leave motorways as blue - it's not such a critical
>> problem as the invisible green trunk roads. Adding one
>>
>
> For me the problem is the same - blue looks like a river and I don't know
> why at least some of UK-ers likes to see the London area roads like this (I
> mean: having to spot two most important road types!):
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=9/51.3289/-0.0673
>
> Its not that "UK style" doesn't work for the rest of the world, it also
> doesn't work for UK on OSM, because we have much more data visible than
> other maps.
>
> That's not against this or any other local styling - I never underestimate
> the power of old habits and I'd like the people to have what they want on
> the output, no matter why they want it, but it's just not going to happen
> as long as default style has a mission to be universal.
>
>
> --
> "The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags
> down" [A. Cohen]
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 22.08.2015 1:47, Richard Mann napisał(a):

I'd be tempted to leave motorways as blue - it's not such a critical
problem as the invisible green trunk roads. Adding one


For me the problem is the same - blue looks like a river and I don't 
know why at least some of UK-ers likes to see the London area roads like 
this (I mean: having to spot two most important road types!):


http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=9/51.3289/-0.0673

Its not that "UK style" doesn't work for the rest of the world, it also 
doesn't work for UK on OSM, because we have much more data visible than 
other maps.


That's not against this or any other local styling - I never 
underestimate the power of old habits and I'd like the people to have 
what they want on the output, no matter why they want it, but it's just 
not going to happen as long as default style has a mission to be 
universal.


--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Minh Nguyen]

On 2015-08-21 03:13, Colin Smale wrote:

While we are at it, what about specific symbols for train/metro stations
per operator? That is also a great "landmark" for map users.


I'd love to see that in the Transportation map. The difference with 
highway shields is that the Standard style is already badging highways, 
but in a format that seems foreign to people in the U.S.


--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Richard Mann]

I'd be tempted to leave motorways as blue - it's not such a critical
problem as the invisible green trunk roads. Adding one more shade of red to
the existing color-progression is probably achievable. Two seems to be
pushing it.

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Daniel Koć  wrote:

> W dniu 20.08.2015 3:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson napisał(a):
>
> Should this be a new, alternative style instead?
>>
>
> Looks like New Hope is coming to fix The Great Tertiary Problem ;-} :
>
>
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-133529853
>
> However in my opinion more "alternative" styles on OSM.org are necessity
> anyway, as I have already wrote:
>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-August/073895.html
>
> --
> "The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags
> down" [A. Cohen]
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 20.08.2015 3:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson napisał(a):


Should this be a new, alternative style instead?


Looks like New Hope is coming to fix The Great Tertiary Problem ;-} :

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-133529853

However in my opinion more "alternative" styles on OSM.org are necessity 
anyway, as I have already wrote:


https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-August/073895.html

--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Christoph Hormann]

On Friday 21 August 2015, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> >
> > What you are proposing is basically design by committee
> > (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee) which is
> > rampant everywhere in OSM and kills innovation.
>
> without advocating it, this can also work. The building of the German
> parliament comes to mind (Reichstag). [...]

Oh, if we only had that kind of budget...

(just for reference: that was 600 Million D-Mark back then)

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> Am 20.08.2015 um 11:59 schrieb Paweł Paprota :
> 
> What you are proposing is basically design by committee
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee) which is rampant
> everywhere in OSM and kills innovation.


without advocating it, this can also work. The building of the German 
parliament comes to mind (Reichstag). Sir Foster had won the competition for 
the restructuring in the 1990ies, but with a complete different design 
(basically a huge roof covering the building and its surroundings, by the time 
referred to as Germany's biggest petrol station by some critics). After 
intervention of the parliament against this winning design, chosen by a 
committee of experts amongst all contributions to the competition, there was a 
longer process during which tens of different cupolas were presented and 
rejected, and after some iterations the actual design evolved. Foster had 
originally been against a new cupola but in the end the final design (heavily 
influenced by a committee) was widely acclaimed.

There's few rules without exception ;-)

cheers 
Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Paul Johnson]

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 5:13 AM, Colin Smale  wrote:
>
> While we are at it, what about specific symbols for train/metro stations
> per operator? That is also a great "landmark" for map users.
>
I'd settle for the transit map acknowledging that colour=* is a tag that
exists for exactly the purpose of rendering transit maps, as it would make
dealing with some systems (MTTA in Tulsa and especially TriMet in Portland
come immediately to mind) easier to read and line up with the real world
situation.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Colin Smale]

 

While we are at it, what about specific symbols for train/metro stations
per operator? That is also a great "landmark" for map users. 

On 2015-08-21 11:57, Paul Johnson wrote: 

> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Minh Nguyen  
> wrote:
> 
>> Lester Caine  lsces.co.uk [1]> writes:
>> 
>>> Just what is the convention in the US, Russia or China?
>> 
>> Regarding the U.S., Paul and I describe the conventions here in detail:
>> 
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-August/073892.html
>> 
>> But the short version is: real highway shields. Their absence is striking to
>> Americans, far more than the highway colors (which aren't as uniform in U.S.
>> print cartography as they are in the U.K.). There are plenty of technical
>> issues to work out, in any case:
>> 
>> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/508
> 
> Yeah, this is jarring for most North American users, as Canadian, Mexican and 
> even some Japanese maps (probably more prevalent to English maps of Japan, 
> though) often use the style popular in the US, and I would hope that 
> rendering the refs off relations with shields should be considered mandatory 
> for the next update. 
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
 

Links:
--
[1] http://lsces.co.uk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Paul Johnson]

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Minh Nguyen 
wrote:

> Lester Caine  lsces.co.uk> writes:
>
> > Just what is the convention in the US, Russia or China?
>
> Regarding the U.S., Paul and I describe the conventions here in detail:
>
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-August/073892.html
>
> But the short version is: real highway shields. Their absence is striking
> to
> Americans, far more than the highway colors (which aren't as uniform in
> U.S.
> print cartography as they are in the U.K.). There are plenty of technical
> issues to work out, in any case:
>
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/508
>

Yeah, this is jarring for most North American users, as Canadian, Mexican
and even some Japanese maps (probably more prevalent to English maps of
Japan, though) often use the style popular in the US, and I would hope that
rendering the refs off relations with shields should be considered
mandatory for the next update.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Minh Nguyen]

Lester Caine  lsces.co.uk> writes:

> Just what is the convention in the US, Russia or China?

Regarding the U.S., Paul and I describe the conventions here in detail:

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-August/073892.html

But the short version is: real highway shields. Their absence is striking to
Americans, far more than the highway colors (which aren't as uniform in U.S.
print cartography as they are in the U.K.). There are plenty of technical
issues to work out, in any case:

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/508

-- 
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Lester Caine]

On 20/08/15 22:46, Minh Nguyen wrote:
>  - Shields are either reproduced in colors that match the signage, or
> they're colored to match the road. So a map might end up with white-on-blue
> Interstate shields, red-on-white U.S. route shields, and black-on-white
> state route shields.
> 
> I would consider the proposed style to be closer to what a U.S. visitor
> would expect than the current UK-influenced style.

Actually I'm just looking to ditch the bloody rounded ends on the UK
maps ... It's not something I recognise as 'UK style' ... someone
invented it ... On OSMAND it makes the road and motorway numbers
difficult to read ( and OSMAND has lost the green roads which is
something I'm trying to get back there as well! :) )

One thing which I still find a problem is that 'B' roads in the UK are
'yellow', not the unclassified ones so I'd like to loose the orange back
to yellow and then correct the problem that having half of the local
short cuts difficult to see and other less useful ones highlighted. This
is probably simply that the wrong tagging is being used, but some of
these smaller roads are essentially main routes so tagging as a 'service
road' is correct for the local usage, but not for main stream routing
and where the likes of OSMAND simply gets the routing wrong ... as do
other routers :(

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Minh Nguyen]

Paul Johnson  ursamundi.org> writes:

> Along these lines, the standard style as it isn't too far off from what
Americans expect out of a motorist-oriented roadmap (though mapgeeks might
see it as a bit "German" by comparison to our maps).  Surface streets tend
to be all the same color (usually purple or red) with the thickness of the
lines tending to be rather thin, increasing in thickness up to primary or
sometimes trunk, with motorways tending to be purple with red borders.  Toll
roads are always green, there's never ways that are green that are not
toll.  This style of rendering is almost certainly heavily influenced by
Rand McNally, given it's ubiquity for casual use maps, which traditionally
has favored as described above in a somewhat simplified, stylized form (such
as rather than each ramp mapped out in detail, an entire, possibly almost
absurdly complex junction, is simplified to a single white square
representing a motorway junction).  Rand McNally was, for quite a long time,
the official cartography provider for the American Automobile Association,
which probably helped propel this style as an expectation.  Thomas Guide
(still usually preferred by professional local drivers even when equipped
with a GPS in the US, as a single metro gets published as a lay-flat atlas
hundreds or thousands of pages long with detailed annotation, sometimes down
to building suite level, at a scale roughly equal to z20 and handy for that
"last thousand feet" navigation) tends to use the same form, but rather than
simplifying junctions, often goes the map porn route by mapping out
everything to scale without simplification.

A few additional observations from having used a variety of print atlases by
Rand McNally, DeLorme, and municipal suppliers:

 - Controlled-access highways (that is, motorways with dual carriageways)
are commonly colored red, amber, purple, or blue. The specific color doesn't
matter so much, just as long as it isn't green (which is reserved for toll
roads, as Paul points out). Motorways are drawn as 2-3 parallel strokes,
imitating the dual carriageways.

 - Limited-access roads (think trunk or primary) are given a single thick
stroke, colored black, except for U.S. routes, which are usually red. All
other roads are given a single, thin stroke. In the West, prominent unpaved
roads might be dashed. There usually aren't any other classifications.

 - Streets in general are very thin because each street label is placed
above the street, not on it. However, I have a few municipal maps that do
place the label inside much wider roads, giving the map a more casual feel,
less like a schematic.

 - Full motorway junctions are simplified into white squares or diamonds,
while partial junctions are half that: a thin rectangle. At higher "zoom
levels", a complex junction such as a cloverleaf is drawn in full, but the
space inside it is filled in the same color as the motorway.

 - Shields are either reproduced in colors that match the signage, or
they're colored to match the road. So a map might end up with white-on-blue
Interstate shields, red-on-white U.S. route shields, and black-on-white
state route shields.

I would consider the proposed style to be closer to what a U.S. visitor
would expect than the current UK-influenced style.

-- 
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Pierre Béland]

The humanitarian style uses a good compromize to represent the hierarchy of 
roads. The blue is replaced by a violet color. This maitains a larger color 
palette to represent the hierarchy of roads.

And, importantly, the yellow color is kept for tertiary roads. I also think 
that it is important to color the tertiary roads to  show a good hierarchy of 
roads in rural areas.  
  
Pierre 

  De : Jóhannes Birgir Jensson 
 À : talk@openstreetmap.org 
 Envoyé le : Jeudi 20 août 2015 15h37
 Objet : Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift
   
Þann 20.8.2015 18:36, skrifaði Frederik Ramm:
> Your use case of "easily recognizable tertiary road in sparsely 
> populated regions" is valid, but perhaps it is "niche" enough to 
> accept that it need to be served by the main map style.

I'm fairly certain that the rural regions of the world are not a "niche" 
but where we are sorely lacking in data and where our growth in Africa 
(for example) will come. Having done data quality checks on settlements 
of the world thousands of them are still just a name on the map with no 
road connections and there tertiary roads will be needed to go.

I'm not averse to red/yellow taking over personally but the expense is 
too great for me at the moment. We need to find a way to make tertiary 
still recognizable.

--JBJ



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


  ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Jóhannes Birgir Jensson]

Þann 20.8.2015 18:36, skrifaði Frederik Ramm:
Your use case of "easily recognizable tertiary road in sparsely 
populated regions" is valid, but perhaps it is "niche" enough to 
accept that it need to be served by the main map style.


I'm fairly certain that the rural regions of the world are not a "niche" 
but where we are sorely lacking in data and where our growth in Africa 
(for example) will come. Having done data quality checks on settlements 
of the world thousands of them are still just a name on the map with no 
road connections and there tertiary roads will be needed to go.


I'm not averse to red/yellow taking over personally but the expense is 
too great for me at the moment. We need to find a way to make tertiary 
still recognizable.


--JBJ

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Paul Norman]

On 8/20/2015 9:32 AM, john whelan wrote:
As someone affected I wish to dissent therefore you do not have 
consensus not every one consents.


Although not essential to the style discussion, I think it's important 
to correct this point. Consensus is not unanimity. 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2418#section-3.3 is a good read, as it 
mentions mailing lists. Another part is identifying and resolving of 
concerns. This does not mean everyone will agree with how their concern 
is resolved, which is impossible when two concerns do not have a 
compatible resolution.


The decision to merge or not lies with the maintainers, and ultimately, 
with Andy. We'll look at comments on the Github issue, the cartography 
change and come to a final decision.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 08/20/2015 03:16 AM, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
> Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to
> verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road
> is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great
> Colour Shift.

...

> Should this be a new, alternative style instead?

Disadvantages of offering and maintaining 2 different styles:

1. uses more disk space on tile servers
2. uses more time to render tiles (i.e. slower updates, or more hardware
required)
3. harder to keep styles current when making improvements

Your use case of "easily recognizable tertiary road in sparsely
populated regions" is valid, but perhaps it is "niche" enough to accept
that it need to be served by the main map style.

I'm in favour of the change simply because it is a change.

As a project, we must take great care not to ossify. Humans are
inherently change averse; most people prefer "the same as yesterday"
most of the time. If we allow the project to become too averse to change
then we'll never see progress. (What, API 0.7 you say? Just when I had
0.6 hardcoded in my 37 applications, no way!)

This is not change for change's sake (although if it were my decision,
I'd even be tempted to do that just to keep us alert) - this is a well
thought out suggestion and I don't see why we shouldn't, after all these
years, do something else, colour-wise, for a while.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Richard Mann]

I'm happy to support a shades of red/yellow road system for the default
map.

The "UK" colours only really work at small scale with heavy casing (with
landuse eg forests muted). The green for trunk roads used for OS 1:50,000
is only recent, much darker than the green used for OSM, and a
cartographical abomination (in my view), being much too dominant. Until a
few years ago, it was only motorways that were different. The colours at
1:25,000 have always been slightly different again.

As ever, if you want something done your own particular way, do it
yourself. Rendering isn't *that* difficult.

The default map needs to work at all zooms, and all* latitudes.

*excluding the tricky bits around the poles, obviously
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Paul Johnson]

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Lester Caine  wrote:

> On 20/08/15 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
> > The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the
> > project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these
> > zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page
> > of our website, a blow to those who use the default tiles through uMap
> > or similarly and depend on the UK rainbow road style and makes life
> > harder for mappers to visually confirm the type of road.
> >
> > Should this be a new, alternative style instead?
>
> That a UK version will appear is a simple fact. Ideally I would like
> anybody looking up OSM in the UK to be directed to that version. That
> may be a little more difficult to achieve, but removes the WTF provided
> by a more international solution? The problem of cause is that one has
> to switch to another server to get areas outside the UK unless we can
> provided a complete duplicate of the existing service ... retaining the
> current style base.
>
> For me, the new style is a pointless exercise since I NEED to retain a
> UK view of the data, and I am sure other countries would also prefer to
> retain their own road colour preferences so trying to provide an
> international style has a limited 'market'? If anything it simply drives
> us to provided more local styled services?
>

I don't have a problem with this, the (from a USian perspective) odd style
of the rather UK-centric style of the standard and cyclemap styles didn't
help with the learning curve.


> I'm not going to object to the current plans, simply because I don't
> have to live with it, but I don't think that it IS the right development
> path for many reasons. Just what is the convention in the US, Russia or
> China?
>

Along these lines, the standard style as it isn't too far off from what
Americans expect out of a motorist-oriented roadmap (though mapgeeks might
see it as a bit "German" by comparison to our maps).  Surface streets tend
to be all the same color (usually purple or red) with the thickness of the
lines tending to be rather thin, increasing in thickness up to primary or
sometimes trunk, with motorways tending to be purple with red borders.
Toll roads are *always* green, there's *never* ways that are green that are
not toll.  This style of rendering is almost certainly heavily influenced
by Rand McNally, given it's ubiquity for casual use maps, which
traditionally has favored as described above in a somewhat simplified,
stylized form (such as rather than each ramp mapped out in detail, an
entire, possibly almost absurdly complex junction, is simplified to a
single white square representing a motorway junction).  Rand McNally was,
for quite a long time, the official cartography provider for the American
Automobile Association, which probably helped propel this style as an
expectation.  Thomas Guide (still usually preferred by professional local
drivers even when equipped with a GPS in the US, as a single metro gets
published as a lay-flat atlas hundreds or thousands of pages long with
detailed annotation, sometimes down to building suite level, at a scale
roughly equal to z20 and handy for that "last thousand feet" navigation)
tends to use the same form, but rather than simplifying junctions, often
goes the map porn route by mapping out everything to scale without
simplification.

Metro Regional Government (the regional government on the Oregon side of
the Portland metropolitian area) probably had the most influence on what
people expect out of a bicycle map in the US, with the above style for the
Thomas Guide being refitted to the same form factor, layout and scale as
one would expect from a Rand McNally metro level map (largely for sake of
being able to actually stow it conveniently on a bicycle) printed on
waterproof, ripstop paper similar to what you'd find on a land surveyor's
notebook, though anything that falls outside of the cycleway network is
"greyed out" like an unavailable menu item in a WIMP-style GUI.  Difficult
intersections and junctions get a red circle around them, dedicated
cycleways are purple, surface streets with bike lanes tend to be a thin
blue line, bicycle boulevards a thick blue line.  Streets in the network
that have no bicycle facilities are green if two or all three of these are
true:  Wide, low motorist speed, low motorist volume (mostly residential
side streets that aren't bike boulevards).  Yellow if two of the following
are true: High motorist speed, high motorist volume, or no escape space
(major arterial streets with wide outside lanes and freeways tend to make
this).  Red qualifies pretty much any situation yellow would if all three
yellow conditions are true or two of the yellow conditions but other
hazards are present (the kind of thing that only folks like Wolfpack Hustle
or someone going for full completion of every Strava KOM in the region are
willing to ride, yet somehow get included in the cyc

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[john whelan]

As someone affected I wish to dissent therefore you do not have consensus
not every one consents.

Cheerio John



On 20 August 2015 at 12:26, Christoph Hormann  wrote:

> On Thursday 20 August 2015, Andy Townsend wrote:
> > On 20/08/2015 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
> > > According to the github discussion there is an "overwhelming
> > > consensus" [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for
> > > roads to a red-yellow only scheme.
> >
> > I don't think you'll ever get an "overwhelming consensus" from such a
> > large "committee". :)
>
> Yes, i now see that "overwhelming consensus" is a bad choice of words
> here - either there is consensus or there is not, it can not be
> overwhelming.  And it only makes sense to speak of consensus with a
> clearly defined group of people which does not exist here.
>
> So i should have better said among those participating in discussions on
> the matter on several occasions there was a large majority in support
> for such a change.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 20 August 2015, Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 20/08/2015 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
> > According to the github discussion there is an "overwhelming
> > consensus" [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for
> > roads to a red-yellow only scheme.
>
> I don't think you'll ever get an "overwhelming consensus" from such a
> large "committee". :)

Yes, i now see that "overwhelming consensus" is a bad choice of words 
here - either there is consensus or there is not, it can not be 
overwhelming.  And it only makes sense to speak of consensus with a 
clearly defined group of people which does not exist here.

So i should have better said among those participating in discussions on 
the matter on several occasions there was a large majority in support 
for such a change.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Florian Lohoff]

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:09:35AM +0200, Marc Gemis wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson 
> wrote:
> 
> > Should this be a new, alternative style instead?
> 
> 
> IMHO for every user that likes the new scheme, you will find one that hates
> it. And vice versa.

For the fact that there are a lot of people who havent even heard
about this change i doubt the overwhelming consensus aswell.

Yes - OSMs color scheme may at first be odd but we now have it for a
couple of years and it served us well and i dont see the point in
eliminating additional information from the map.

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de
 We need to self-defense - GnuPG/PGP enable your email today!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Andy Townsend]

On 20/08/2015 16:25, Ben Laenen wrote:
Thing is that UK won't ever be happy with another colour scheme and 
the rest of the world won't ever be happy with a UK scheme.


... and then in the UK we can start arguing about and "English" style vs 
a "Scottish" one and then a "Yorkshire" one vs "Surrey" :)


Cheers,

Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Ben Laenen]

> For me, the new style is a pointless exercise since I NEED to retain a
> UK view of the data, and I am sure other countries would also prefer to
> retain their own road colour preferences so trying to provide an
> international style has a limited 'market'? If anything it simply drives
> us to provided more local styled services?

Isn't it possible to have separate UK rendering on the same map, like
on the Mapquest layer? If such a framework is created it could even
open up other renderings for different countries. Thing is that UK
won't ever be happy with another colour scheme and the rest of the
world won't ever be happy with a UK scheme.

Ben

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Lester Caine]

On 20/08/15 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
> The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the
> project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these
> zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page
> of our website, a blow to those who use the default tiles through uMap
> or similarly and depend on the UK rainbow road style and makes life
> harder for mappers to visually confirm the type of road.
> 
> Should this be a new, alternative style instead?

That a UK version will appear is a simple fact. Ideally I would like
anybody looking up OSM in the UK to be directed to that version. That
may be a little more difficult to achieve, but removes the WTF provided
by a more international solution? The problem of cause is that one has
to switch to another server to get areas outside the UK unless we can
provided a complete duplicate of the existing service ... retaining the
current style base.

For me, the new style is a pointless exercise since I NEED to retain a
UK view of the data, and I am sure other countries would also prefer to
retain their own road colour preferences so trying to provide an
international style has a limited 'market'? If anything it simply drives
us to provided more local styled services?

I'm not going to object to the current plans, simply because I don't
have to live with it, but I don't think that it IS the right development
path for many reasons. Just what is the convention in the US, Russia or
China?

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Andy Townsend]

On 20/08/2015 02:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:


According to the github discussion there is an "overwhelming 
consensus" [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads 
to a red-yellow only scheme.


I don't think you'll ever get an "overwhelming consensus" from such a 
large "committee". :)


I rendered z0-z11 locally to see what it looks like and was pleasantly 
surprised - it's much less "orange" than some of the previous iterations 
that there have been discussions and blog posts about, and better for 
it.  I'm not quite sure that z7 is quite there (see the difference at 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586#comment31695 
), and obviously any change takes getting used to, but it's not markedly 
worse than what went before and does resolve the "invisible trunk road" 
problem, which really is a problem.


Cheers,

Andy (SomeoneElse)


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Colin Smale]

 

I'm not proposing anything. Merely observing. 

I am not the only one confused about which definition of "overwhelming
consensus" was used... 

--colin 

On 2015-08-20 11:59, Paweł Paprota wrote: 

> What you are proposing is basically design by committee
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee) which is rampant
> everywhere in OSM and kills innovation. Everyone wants to pile on their
> own cause - be it privacy (see the latest pull request on Github
> regarding Gravatar for another viable contender for the Waste of Time
> prize) or some weird anarchy/freedom/whatever world views.
> 
> At the same time there's a guy (Mateusz) who took on the task of making
> the default style not suck - so what do people here do? Of course, let's
> discuss this to death until everyone agrees. But then you may find that
> no one wants to work with you on this anymore.
> 
> In Poland we have this often-used saying with regards to the political
> or social situation (yeah, we Poles like to complain a lot!) - it sucks
> but at least it's stable!
> 
> Paweł
> 
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 11:39, Colin Smale wrote:
> 
>> That discussion is only a waste of time because people hope that a consensus 
>> will magically appear. The subject of the discussion is absolutely something 
>> which deserves air-time. I am not talking about the specific case of 
>> abandoned railways, but about who has the right to decide what data has no 
>> place in OSM and order its deletion.
> 
>> What was that famous line in Animal Farm again?
> 
>> --colin
> 
>> On 2015-08-20 10:53, Paweł Paprota wrote:
> 
> I'm taking bets on whether this thread will have more replies than the
> "abandoned railroads" (100+ and still going strong!) and win the prize
> for the Biggest Waste of Time in OSM for 2015.
> 
> YES WE CAN('T)
> 
> Paweł
> 
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 03:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote: For those that 
> did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary 
> entries[1[http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586]],
>  
> postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed 
> Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented.
> 
> According to the github discussion there is an "overwhelming consensus" 
> [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a 
> red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming consensus 
> formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor 
> on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't see 
> this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to 
> tell me where it formed or where I can find it.
> 
> The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue 
> for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision 
> was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours 
> "upwards" so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the 
> colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.
> 
> Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified 
> roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to 
> see which is the wider one.
> 
> This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I find 
> to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural areas 
> where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or 
> using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads snaking 
> through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the non 
> tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes 
> the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but 
> still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours 
> imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they could 
> lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus.
> 
> Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to 
> verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road 
> is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great 
> Colour Shift.
> 
> Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work in 
> displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges 
> that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now has a 
> disclaimer:
> 
> "Among potential problems are that it is now harder to recognise road 
> type of given road, especially in situation where there is no 
> possibility to compare it with other road types.
> Such significant change will be confusing for current users of this
> style.
> UK color coding of roads is well known for many people, for them a new 
> style - even assuming that it would be intuitive for them - will be less 
> useful.)"
> 
> The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the 
> project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these 
> 

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Jo]

I must admit I never really liked the scheme where motorways get the colour
of water... I also grew up with orange/yellow motorways on the map.

But I (try to) complain as little as possible. So I'm glad people are
trying to come up with a 'more international' way of rendering the map. If
that's even possible.

On the other hand, I don't like that the difference between tertiary and
unclassified/residential disappears almost completely.

I don't have the time and energy to set up a rendering chain, so maybe I
better shut up...

Polyglot

2015-08-20 11:59 GMT+02:00 Paweł Paprota :

> What you are proposing is basically design by committee
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee) which is rampant
> everywhere in OSM and kills innovation. Everyone wants to pile on their
> own cause - be it privacy (see the latest pull request on Github
> regarding Gravatar for another viable contender for the Waste of Time
> prize) or some weird anarchy/freedom/whatever world views.
>
> At the same time there's a guy (Mateusz) who took on the task of making
> the default style not suck - so what do people here do? Of course, let's
> discuss this to death until everyone agrees. But then you may find that
> no one wants to work with you on this anymore.
>
> In Poland we have this often-used saying with regards to the political
> or social situation (yeah, we Poles like to complain a lot!) - it sucks
> but at least it's stable!
>
> Paweł
>
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 11:39, Colin Smale wrote:
> >
>
>
> >
> > That discussion is only a waste of time because people hope that a
> consensus will magically appear. The subject of the discussion is
> absolutely something which deserves air-time. I am not talking about the
> specific case of abandoned railways, but about who has the right to decide
> what data has no place in OSM and order its deletion.
>
>
> > What was that famous line in Animal Farm again?
>
>
> > --colin
>
>
> > On 2015-08-20 10:53, Paweł Paprota wrote:
>
>
> >> I'm taking bets on whether this thread will have more replies than the
> >>  "abandoned railroads" (100+ and still going strong!) and win the prize
> >>  for the Biggest Waste of Time in OSM for 2015.
> >>
> >>  YES WE CAN('T)
> >>
> >>  Paweł
> >>
> >>  On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 03:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
> >>> For those that did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary entries[1[
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586]],
> >>>  postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed
> >>>  Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented.
> >>>
> >>>  According to the github discussion there is an "overwhelming
> consensus"
> >>>  [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a
> >>>  red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming
> consensus
> >>>  formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor
> >>>  on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't
> see
> >>>  this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to
> >>>  tell me where it formed or where I can find it.
> >>>
> >>>  The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue
> >>>  for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision
> >>>  was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours
> >>>  "upwards" so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the
> >>>  colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.
> >>>
> >>>  Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified
> >>>  roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to
> >>>  see which is the wider one.
> >>>
> >>>  This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I
> find
> >>>  to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural
> areas
> >>>  where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or
> >>>  using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads
> snaking
> >>>  through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the
> non
> >>>  tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes
> >>>  the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but
> >>>  still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours
> >>>  imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they
> could
> >>>  lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus.
> >>>
> >>>  Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder
> to
> >>>  verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary
> road
> >>>  is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed
> Great
> >>>  Colour Shift.
> >>>
> >>>  Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work
> in
> >>>  displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges
> >>>  that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now h

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Paweł Paprota]

What you are proposing is basically design by committee
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_by_committee) which is rampant
everywhere in OSM and kills innovation. Everyone wants to pile on their
own cause - be it privacy (see the latest pull request on Github
regarding Gravatar for another viable contender for the Waste of Time
prize) or some weird anarchy/freedom/whatever world views.

At the same time there's a guy (Mateusz) who took on the task of making
the default style not suck - so what do people here do? Of course, let's
discuss this to death until everyone agrees. But then you may find that
no one wants to work with you on this anymore.

In Poland we have this often-used saying with regards to the political
or social situation (yeah, we Poles like to complain a lot!) - it sucks
but at least it's stable!

Paweł

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 11:39, Colin Smale wrote:
> 


> 
> That discussion is only a waste of time because people hope that a consensus 
> will magically appear. The subject of the discussion is absolutely something 
> which deserves air-time. I am not talking about the specific case of 
> abandoned railways, but about who has the right to decide what data has no 
> place in OSM and order its deletion.


> What was that famous line in Animal Farm again?


> --colin


> On 2015-08-20 10:53, Paweł Paprota wrote:


>> I'm taking bets on whether this thread will have more replies than the
>>  "abandoned railroads" (100+ and still going strong!) and win the prize
>>  for the Biggest Waste of Time in OSM for 2015.
>> 
>>  YES WE CAN('T)
>> 
>>  Paweł
>> 
>>  On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 03:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
>>> For those that did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary 
>>> entries[1[http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586]],
>>>  
>>>  postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed 
>>>  Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented.
>>> 
>>>  According to the github discussion there is an "overwhelming consensus" 
>>>  [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a 
>>>  red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming consensus 
>>>  formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor 
>>>  on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't see 
>>>  this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to 
>>>  tell me where it formed or where I can find it.
>>> 
>>>  The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue 
>>>  for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision 
>>>  was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours 
>>>  "upwards" so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the 
>>>  colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.
>>> 
>>>  Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified 
>>>  roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to 
>>>  see which is the wider one.
>>> 
>>>  This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I find 
>>>  to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural areas 
>>>  where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or 
>>>  using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads snaking 
>>>  through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the non 
>>>  tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes 
>>>  the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but 
>>>  still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours 
>>>  imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they could 
>>>  lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus.
>>> 
>>>  Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to 
>>>  verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road 
>>>  is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great 
>>>  Colour Shift.
>>> 
>>>  Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work in 
>>>  displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges 
>>>  that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now has a 
>>>  disclaimer:
>>> 
>>>  "Among potential problems are that it is now harder to recognise road 
>>>  type of given road, especially in situation where there is no 
>>>  possibility to compare it with other road types.
>>>  Such significant change will be confusing for current users of this
>>>  style.
>>>  UK color coding of roads is well known for many people, for them a new 
>>>  style - even assuming that it would be intuitive for them - will be less 
>>>  useful.)"
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the 
>>>  project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these 
>>>  zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front p

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Colin Smale]

 

That discussion is only a waste of time because people hope that a
consensus will magically appear. The subject of the discussion is
absolutely something which deserves air-time. I am not talking about the
specific case of abandoned railways, but about who has the right to
decide what data has no place in OSM and order its deletion. 

What was that famous line in Animal Farm again? 

--colin 

On 2015-08-20 10:53, Paweł Paprota wrote: 

> I'm taking bets on whether this thread will have more replies than the
> "abandoned railroads" (100+ and still going strong!) and win the prize
> for the Biggest Waste of Time in OSM for 2015.
> 
> YES WE CAN('T)
> 
> Paweł
> 
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 03:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote: 
> 
>> For those that did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary entries[1 [1]], 
>> postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed 
>> Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented.
>> 
>> According to the github discussion there is an "overwhelming consensus" 
>> [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a 
>> red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming consensus 
>> formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor 
>> on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't see 
>> this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to 
>> tell me where it formed or where I can find it.
>> 
>> The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue 
>> for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision 
>> was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours 
>> "upwards" so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the 
>> colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.
>> 
>> Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified 
>> roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to 
>> see which is the wider one.
>> 
>> This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I find 
>> to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural areas 
>> where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or 
>> using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads snaking 
>> through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the non 
>> tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes 
>> the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but 
>> still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours 
>> imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they could 
>> lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus.
>> 
>> Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to 
>> verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road 
>> is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great 
>> Colour Shift.
>> 
>> Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work in 
>> displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges 
>> that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now has a 
>> disclaimer:
>> 
>> "Among potential problems are that it is now harder to recognise road 
>> type of given road, especially in situation where there is no 
>> possibility to compare it with other road types.
>> Such significant change will be confusing for current users of this
>> style.
>> UK color coding of roads is well known for many people, for them a new 
>> style - even assuming that it would be intuitive for them - will be less 
>> useful.)"
>> 
>> The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the 
>> project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these 
>> zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page 
>> of our website, a blow to those who use the default tiles through uMap 
>> or similarly and depend on the UK rainbow road style and makes life 
>> harder for mappers to visually confirm the type of road.
>> 
>> Should this be a new, alternative style instead?
>> 
>> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586
>> [2] 
>> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-130592532
>> 
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
 

Links:
--
[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Paweł Paprota]

I'm taking bets on whether this thread will have more replies than the
"abandoned railroads" (100+ and still going strong!) and win the prize
for the Biggest Waste of Time in OSM for 2015.

YES WE CAN('T)

Paweł

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015, at 03:16, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
> For those that did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary entries[1], 
> postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed 
> Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented.
> 
> According to the github discussion there is an "overwhelming consensus" 
> [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a 
> red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming consensus 
> formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor 
> on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't see 
> this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to 
> tell me where it formed or where I can find it.
> 
> The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue 
> for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision 
> was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours 
> "upwards" so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the 
> colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.
> 
> Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified 
> roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to 
> see which is the wider one.
> 
> This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I find 
> to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural areas 
> where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or 
> using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads snaking 
> through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the non 
> tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes 
> the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but 
> still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours 
> imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they could 
> lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus.
> 
> Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to 
> verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road 
> is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great 
> Colour Shift.
> 
> Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work in 
> displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges 
> that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now has a 
> disclaimer:
> 
> "Among potential problems are that it is now harder to recognise road 
> type of given road, especially in situation where there is no 
> possibility to compare it with other road types.
> Such significant change will be confusing for current users of this
> style.
> UK color coding of roads is well known for many people, for them a new 
> style - even assuming that it would be intuitive for them - will be less 
> useful.)"
> 
> 
> The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the 
> project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these 
> zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page 
> of our website, a blow to those who use the default tiles through uMap 
> or similarly and depend on the UK rainbow road style and makes life 
> harder for mappers to visually confirm the type of road.
> 
> Should this be a new, alternative style instead?
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586
> [2] 
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-130592532
> 
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Marc Gemis]

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Jóhannes Birgir Jensson 
wrote:

> Should this be a new, alternative style instead?


IMHO for every user that likes the new scheme, you will find one that hates
it. And vice versa.

As someone that grew up with Falck and Michelin maps, it took a long time
to understand why someone would come up with such a weird color scheme (the
rainbow scheme you refer to). I had read somewhere that it was done because
the ugly colours would force people to make their own maps. Only later I
understood it was the common colour scheme in the UK.

I guess we will never know what's the best way to proceed. Usually people
that don't like the change are very vocal, the lovers not so much. And then
there are many many people that do not speak out or do not care.

FYI, the Britisch community is trying to set up their own tile server to
preserve the rainbow colour scheme, at least for the British islands.


regards

m
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 20 August 2015, Jc3b3hannes Birgir Jensson wrote:
>
> According to the github discussion there is an "overwhelming
> consensus" [2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads
> to a red-yellow only scheme.

Note this comment is mostly based on the early discussion of the matter, 
in particular in 

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/102

and in the early diary entries by Mateusz but also in countless comments 
made over the time elsewhere concerning the road color scheme.

This of course does not necessarily mean that all those supporting a 
change in general are fine with the scheme that is now developed by 
Mateusz.

In general among those in favour of keeping the current scheme there 
have been only very few specific suggestions how to address the 
problems this leads to in the style, in particular the fact that the 
road network as a whole is not recognizable as such and the color 
conflicts with other colors in the style.

If you think a different styling than what is currently proposed would 
be better it would be best to show it.  Suggesting to use a paler 
yellow for tertiary or the color scheme of a different style is one 
thing, actually demonstrating how this looks and addressing issues this 
creates is another.  I know setting up the system for doing and viewing 
style changes is not trivial but if - as you say - there are so many 
people that would be badly affected by it there should be someone to 
demonstrate a viable alternative.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] The Proposed Great Colour Shift

[Jóhannes Birgir Jensson]

For those that did not check on Mateusz Konieczny diary entries[1], 
postings to this mailing list and github discussions then the Proposed 
Great Colour Shift might come as a surprise if it is implemented.


According to the github discussion there is an "overwhelming consensus" 
[2] on moving from current rainbow colour scheme for roads to a 
red-yellow only scheme. I am unsure of where this overwhelming consensus 
formed because I never saw it on this mailing list nor on talk-dev nor 
on announcements, I admit to be an infrequent IRC user but I didn't see 
this overwhelming consensus there and so far no one has been able to 
tell me where it formed or where I can find it.


The design goal seems straight forward, to discontinue green and blue 
for roads and move to red and reddish. For this to happen the decision 
was made to shift current primary, secondary and tertiary colours 
"upwards" so primary is now the colour of secondary and secondary the 
colour of tertiary. Leaving tertiary white.


Tertiary instead gets to be wider than residential and unclassified 
roads, but to be able to spot that you need to have it next to them to 
see which is the wider one.


This one simple change of bleaching tertiary however is something I find 
to be a great hindrance to mapping efforts, particularly in rural areas 
where the roads are isolated and panning over the map, wether in iD or 
using default tiles. Currently it is easy to spot tertiary roads snaking 
through valleys and over vast desert plains, they are yellow and the non 
tertiary roads are white. Tertiary is significant there as it denotes 
the roads between the villages and towns that are often unpaved but 
still the most important, even the only, road. Lesser white colours 
imply the roads not being between larger settlements although they could 
lead to hamlets. The guidelines for mapping in Africa state thus.


Removing the colour from tertiary makes all mapping that much harder to 
verify and quality check. Currently it is easy to see if a tertiary road 
is broken with a white unclassified bridge, not so in the proposed Great 
Colour Shift.


Mateusz has been forthcoming with all changes and done sterling work in 
displaying different areas and how they will look. But he acknowledges 
that this change is not beneficial everywhere on the map and now has a 
disclaimer:


"Among potential problems are that it is now harder to recognise road 
type of given road, especially in situation where there is no 
possibility to compare it with other road types.

Such significant change will be confusing for current users of this style.
UK color coding of roads is well known for many people, for them a new 
style - even assuming that it would be intuitive for them - will be less 
useful.)"



The question really arises if this change is beneficial or not for the 
project. Many hours have gone into it and doing CartoCSS on all these 
zoom levels is not trivial. But this is a major shift on the front page 
of our website, a blow to those who use the default tiles through uMap 
or similarly and depend on the UK rainbow road style and makes life 
harder for mappers to visually confirm the type of road.


Should this be a new, alternative style instead?


[1] http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mateusz%20Konieczny/diary/35586
[2] 
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/1736#issuecomment-130592532


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk