Re: [Talk-GB] OSM UK's first tile layer
Hi all,
To address this and some of the other questions:
>Can JOSM and iD display Mapbox .pbf vector tiles?
I don't think JOSM can which is a big shame as it would make it much easier
to host these sort of layers with minimal overhead.
>ensure any transformation from OSGB grid coordinates to WGS84 is accurate
enough
Yes indeed. Currently I used QGIS to transform the data for York however I
see that Mapnik can do the transform itself. For a complete GB dataset I
intend to download all files and bring them together to pass to Mapnik. It
probably then makes sense to have Mapnik do the transform. Any details on
what transformation I should be using would be much appreciated. Likewise
if you know a location that gets a big error if done wrong, that would help
me check.
>Thinner lines could work better
Yes, I think so too.
>consider increasing the max zoom a notch as well
Hopefully the new OSM UK board can investigate that as it will need a
beefier server so would push costs up.
>Are the numbers in wms tiles UPRNs?
My understanding is that they are not. That level of coordination would be
amazing but we're not there with Open Data yet!
P.S. If anyone is aware of the equivalent data for Northern Ireland, Isle
of Man or the Channel Islands, please let me know.
Best regards,
*Rob*
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 at 08:16, Jez Nicholson wrote:
> Nice one. I've been wanting to do this for ages.
>
> Re: file size. Can JOSM and iD display Mapbox .pbf vector tiles? These
> would be smaller.
>
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, 00:22 Rob Nickerson,
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just in time for the AGM, I have just published OSM UK's first tile
>> layer. No don't get too excited it is not a full map render. Instead I have
>> produced a very simple tiling of the Land Registry polygon data now that
>> this is under the OGL Open Data Licence. My view is that this is a good
>> layer to align our mapping too - i.e. when tracing from imagery we should
>> first align the imagery to the Land Registry polygon layer before tracing
>> from the imagery.
>>
>> The tile URL for JOSM is:
>> tms[13,17]:http://tiles.osmuk.org/LRpolygons/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
>>
>> And for now this is *York only* as an example.
>>
>> Feedback that I would appreciate:
>>
>>- Is this worthwhile?
>>- Do you agree that it makes sense for us to all try to align our
>>mapping to this (i.e. apply imagery offsets to align imagery to this
>> before
>>tracing)?
>>- The style is very simple with just a 4 pixel red line. Is this
>>sufficient? What changes can be made?
>>- Any tips on how to keep the PNG file sizes as small as possible?
>>For now I am using the Mapnik rule "png8:c=2:t=1:m=o". Is there anything
>>that can yield smaller file sizes?
>>- What max zoom is worthwhile? Currently it goes to 17, is this
>>enough?
>>
>> Our plan would be to pre-render all the tiles and host them on our site.
>> The data doesn't change much so we would only re-render on request or once
>> a year. My estimate is that we'd need 35GB for tiles to zoom level 17, and
>> 133 GB to get everything to zoom 18. Our current server is on the small
>> side with just 512MB memory and a 100GB disk allowance. It is unsuitable
>> for on the fly rendering and we'd need more disk space to get the level 18
>> zoom. A beefier server is of course possible but any bump in specs comes
>> with an equal bump in costs so worth checking this is worthwhile before
>> proceeding.
>>
>> P.S. The Land Registry themselves host this data on a WMS service rather
>> than a TMS (tile) service. This makes it possible to zoom much further in.
>> If you want to have a look at that detail you can use their website or
>> (temporarily) use the following URL in JOSM. Please don't use this for
>> mapping as we don't have permission to use their WMS service
>>
>> wms:
>> http://inspire.landregistry.gov.uk/inspire/ows?SERVICE=WMS&FORMATS=image%2Fpng&LAYERS=inspire%3ACP.CadastralParcel&FORMAT=image%2Fpng&TRANSPARENT=true&VERSION=1.1.1&REQUEST=GetMap&STYLES=&INFO_FORMAT=application%2Fvnd.ogc.gml&EXCEPTIONS=XML&_OLSALT=0.789927776902914&SRS={proj}&BBOX={bbox}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> *Rob*
>> ___
>> Talk-GB mailing list
>> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>>
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OSM UK's first tile layer
Hi Rob,
Good stuff, it's definitely worthwhile. Thinner lines could work better
(for me 1px would be perfect), especially that the max zoom stops at 17.
You could perhaps consider increasing the max zoom a notch as well.
Are the numbers in wms tiles UPRNs? If so, you could consider displaying
them as well.
Best regards,
ndrw6
On 17/10/2020 00:20, Rob Nickerson wrote:
Hi all,
Just in time for the AGM, I have just published OSM UK's first tile
layer. No don't get too excited it is not a full map render. Instead I
have produced a very simple tiling of the Land Registry polygon data
now that this is under the OGL Open Data Licence. My view is that this
is a good layer to align our mapping too - i.e. when tracing from
imagery we should first align the imagery to the Land Registry polygon
layer before tracing from the imagery.
The tile URL for JOSM is:
tms[13,17]:http://tiles.osmuk.org/LRpolygons/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
And for now this is _York only_ as an example.
Feedback that I would appreciate:
* Is this worthwhile?
* Do you agree that it makes sense for us to all try to align our
mapping to this (i.e. apply imagery offsets to align imagery to
this before tracing)?
* The style is very simple with just a 4 pixel red line. Is this
sufficient? What changes can be made?
* Any tips on how to keep the PNG file sizes as small as possible?
For now I am using the Mapnik rule "png8:c=2:t=1:m=o". Is there
anything that can yield smaller file sizes?
* What max zoom is worthwhile? Currently it goes to 17, is this enough?
Our plan would be to pre-render all the tiles and host them on our
site. The data doesn't change much so we would only re-render on
request or once a year. My estimate is that we'd need 35GB for tiles
to zoom level 17, and 133 GB to get everything to zoom 18. Our current
server is on the small side with just 512MB memory and a 100GB disk
allowance. It is unsuitable for on the fly rendering and we'd need
more disk space to get the level 18 zoom. A beefier server is of
course possible but any bump in specs comes with an equal bump in
costs so worth checking this is worthwhile before proceeding.
P.S. The Land Registry themselves host this data on a WMS service
rather than a TMS (tile) service. This makes it possible to zoom much
further in. If you want to have a look at that detail you can use
their website or (temporarily) use the following URL in JOSM. Please
don't use this for mapping as we don't have permission to use their
WMS service
wms:http://inspire.landregistry.gov.uk/inspire/ows?SERVICE=WMS&FORMATS=image%2Fpng&LAYERS=inspire%3ACP.CadastralParcel&FORMAT=image%2Fpng&TRANSPARENT=true&VERSION=1.1.1&REQUEST=GetMap&STYLES=&INFO_FORMAT=application%2Fvnd.ogc.gml&EXCEPTIONS=XML&_OLSALT=0.789927776902914&SRS={proj}&BBOX={bbox}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}
Best regards,
*Rob*
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OSM UK's first tile layer
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 at 00:22, Rob Nickerson wrote:
> Just in time for the AGM, I have just published OSM UK's first tile layer. No
> don't get too excited it is not a full map render. Instead I have produced a
> very simple tiling of the Land Registry polygon data now that this is under
> the OGL Open Data Licence. My view is that this is a good layer to align our
> mapping too - i.e. when tracing from imagery we should first align the
> imagery to the Land Registry polygon layer before tracing from the imagery.
>
> The tile URL for JOSM is:
> tms[13,17]:http://tiles.osmuk.org/LRpolygons/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
Excellent. Ever since the new Bing imagery landed, I've been after a
good source to align things to. I've been having to rely on my own GPS
traces and/or existing mapping so far.
By the way, when there was some previous discussion on this list about
using OS data for imagery alignment, an issue was raised about needing
to ensure any transformation from OSGB grid coordinates to WGS84 is
accurate enough:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2020-August/025077.html
. Popular transforms may be out by a few meters (which would be
noticeable in our detailed mapping.) Are you doing such a
transformation, and are you sure what you're doing is sufficiently
accurate?
Robert.
--
Robert Whittaker
--
Robert Whittaker
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
Re: [Talk-GB] OSM UK's first tile layer
Nice one. I've been wanting to do this for ages.
Re: file size. Can JOSM and iD display Mapbox .pbf vector tiles? These
would be smaller.
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, 00:22 Rob Nickerson, wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Just in time for the AGM, I have just published OSM UK's first tile layer.
> No don't get too excited it is not a full map render. Instead I have
> produced a very simple tiling of the Land Registry polygon data now that
> this is under the OGL Open Data Licence. My view is that this is a good
> layer to align our mapping too - i.e. when tracing from imagery we should
> first align the imagery to the Land Registry polygon layer before tracing
> from the imagery.
>
> The tile URL for JOSM is:
> tms[13,17]:http://tiles.osmuk.org/LRpolygons/{zoom}/{x}/{y}.png
>
> And for now this is *York only* as an example.
>
> Feedback that I would appreciate:
>
>- Is this worthwhile?
>- Do you agree that it makes sense for us to all try to align our
>mapping to this (i.e. apply imagery offsets to align imagery to this before
>tracing)?
>- The style is very simple with just a 4 pixel red line. Is this
>sufficient? What changes can be made?
>- Any tips on how to keep the PNG file sizes as small as possible? For
>now I am using the Mapnik rule "png8:c=2:t=1:m=o". Is there anything that
>can yield smaller file sizes?
>- What max zoom is worthwhile? Currently it goes to 17, is this enough?
>
> Our plan would be to pre-render all the tiles and host them on our site.
> The data doesn't change much so we would only re-render on request or once
> a year. My estimate is that we'd need 35GB for tiles to zoom level 17, and
> 133 GB to get everything to zoom 18. Our current server is on the small
> side with just 512MB memory and a 100GB disk allowance. It is unsuitable
> for on the fly rendering and we'd need more disk space to get the level 18
> zoom. A beefier server is of course possible but any bump in specs comes
> with an equal bump in costs so worth checking this is worthwhile before
> proceeding.
>
> P.S. The Land Registry themselves host this data on a WMS service rather
> than a TMS (tile) service. This makes it possible to zoom much further in.
> If you want to have a look at that detail you can use their website or
> (temporarily) use the following URL in JOSM. Please don't use this for
> mapping as we don't have permission to use their WMS service
>
> wms:
> http://inspire.landregistry.gov.uk/inspire/ows?SERVICE=WMS&FORMATS=image%2Fpng&LAYERS=inspire%3ACP.CadastralParcel&FORMAT=image%2Fpng&TRANSPARENT=true&VERSION=1.1.1&REQUEST=GetMap&STYLES=&INFO_FORMAT=application%2Fvnd.ogc.gml&EXCEPTIONS=XML&_OLSALT=0.789927776902914&SRS={proj}&BBOX={bbox}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}
>
>
> Best regards,
> *Rob*
> ___
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
___
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
