W dniu 09.07.2014 16:56, Christoph Hormann napisał(a):
This would still require significant additional ressources including
the
workload of managing two separate styles. I don't think testing is the
In my vision testing would be not very much different, but include all
the standard tags we have agreed upon.
problem here, those involved in the standard style design have testing
environments. The key is to enable more people to try out new things
and allow them to communicate and share their results.
You talk only about developers, but what about ordinary mappers with no
such skills? How that may attract them to communicate their thoughts and
needs? Testing style plus feedback on the tag documentation would do,
IMHO.
No, you are then mixing tagging and rendering which as i said is a
really bad idea. Which roads get certain tags should be based on
I don't agree with what you said here: not mixing, but communicating and
(sometimes, when it makes sense!) influencing.
universal, objective rules based on properties of the object 'in the
field', verifiable by any mapper through observation of the road in
question. Making sure these roads are shown in a well readable way in
You will always fall in the trap of localities when working on a global
level, there's no escape - sorry... And which mapper? Our polish team
wants to go mapping to Kazakhstan and what they see as under-track by
our standards is the best road one can get there. So you have to cheat
one way (what observer sees) or another (what he knows). The standards
are just very different and we can't make them uniform.
But rigging the tagging rules to spare the map designer this work (what
you call 'rethink the tagging rules' based on 'rendering issues') is
counterproductive since it devalues the data stored in the tags.
Where did I say the tagger has to spoil the precious data on renderer
demand? If you rethink there's no guarantee you will agree. But you may.
There is no fixed duties in communication! And reality check is a common
way of testing abstract designs. Do you still find it a bad thing?
Then you say mountains should be displayed at z>10 and hills only at
z>15 (or whatever) - i can assure you if this works well in the
Netherlands it won't work in Switzerland and if it works in Peru it
won't work in Greenland (or the other way round - depending on your
Yes, sure, but the same is true for almost every item.
The mountain peaks are different in different locations. There are
place, where there's plenty of them, and where there's nothing at all.
And what do we do about it now? Nothing, it's just the reality. In the
center of city we have so many shops that they make a nasty mess on
default map and I have to look at humanitarian's additional zoom level
to use it reasonably. What would you do about that, knowing that in many
other places in the world (including a street around a corner) the shop
density is not so high?
Diversity and a scale issues are two things we should always have in
mind, even doing good, old, straightforward, big mapping.
I am sorry if this sounds like a rant but there are simply so many tags
Yes, for me it really does sound like that, but at least nobody here
claimed my opinion is a "trolling", as it was once when I was discussing
it on our country forum. =} I was almost sure I touch some edgy stuff,
though it's not what is on my mind - I just want to fix the issues I
see.
used a lot but completely useless in terms of informational value
exactly because of this. Please just make sure you do not fall into
this trap with your peak=* concept.
It was exactly the wall I hit hard originally.
When micromapping I clearly see the informational value of even 2 m
small, but tall peak, just as with other terrain objects (cliffs,
saddles, embankments etc.) and amenities of the same scale (bollards,
lamps, trees, garages, trash bins). But one can't see this value when
sitting on the mountain - and it's hardly surprising. There is a fear
that this small, nasty peaks will spoil our mountains (no, I don't make
it up!). And the need to defeat it. And who could ever care for such a
small details? And it was always like this, so how came it is needed
now? And we don't have good terrain model in project. And... etc.
--
Mambałaga
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
