I keep hearing snagging issues that *might* be resolved by a more federal OSM, in the map presentation as well as in the organisational structure.
Is that something that's ever been considered? On Sun, 13 Dec 2020 at 13:40, Nick <n...@foresters.org> wrote: > Totally agree that openstreetmap.org isn't supposed to be a "general > public" map destination but without knowing user journeys, I assume that is > where most people land. > > Options could be that openstreetmap.org provide alternative links based > on locality and/or develop robust (N.B. tiles from opencyclemap.org seems > to have security issue) local solutions that are found by search engines > (i.e. good search engine optimisation) > On 13/12/2020 12:12, Andy Townsend wrote: > > > On 13/12/2020 11:16, Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-GB wrote: > > Note that someone who wants to show their map style at OSM website can > be included, though they must sponsor hosting > > See > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Featured_tile_layers/Guidelines_for_new_tile_layers > > As far as I know, the main blocker seems to be > "Capable of meeting traffic demands. The proposed tile layer server/server > farm > must be capable of accepting the traffic volume from the OpenStreetMap > website." > > ÖPNVKarte is map style that joined recently. > > Dec 13, 2020, 12:08 by n...@foresters.org: > > Seems to me that apart from the tagging, the issue highlighted here is > with how the general public can easily use OSM? Going to the OSM map, the > layers on offer are Standard, Cycle Map (which does show the driveway > connected) etc. but if a user wants a more specific use this is not easy to > find. To my mind this is where more options from the worldwide map fail to > deliver and is a bigger issue that can be resolved by understanding the > 'customer' journey better? > > The main blocker for a map that shows public footpaths etc. would actually > be the "Global scope and coverage" requirement on that page, since public > footpaths only exist in England and Wales. > > It used to be possible to easily replace tiles from one of the map styles > at osm.org with another one, but since the move to https-only tiles > that's now much harder to do. You can replace (say) > https://map.atownsend.org.uk/hot/9/253/166.png with > https://tile-a.openstreetmap.fr/hot/9/253/166.png at the hosts file > level, but need to click through a "scary browser warning" every few days. > > More generally openstreetmap.org isn't really designed as a "general > public" map destination, which is fair enough (it can't do everything). > It's easy to make suggestions like "it should do X as well" - the tricky > bit is actually doing it and maintaining it. I'd definitely prefer a > project landing page that's closer to the German one > https://openstreetmap.de/ , but I don't have the skills, energy, time or > enthusiasm to make that happen. I particularly like the "showroom" there - > a link to lots of different map styles, separate from the main > openstreetmap.de map. > > Another example that is surely worth mentioning here is > https://cycle.travel - that's designed for a particular use case. I > suspect that most people become aware of OSM by seeing the name at the > bottom-right of a completely different site that someone sent them to > because it was useful. Another indication of this is the number of help > questions that we see where people are having problems with "the > openstreetmap app" or "the site gives an error" (and that site clearly > isn't openstreetmap.org). > > Best Regards, > > Andy > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing > listTalk-GB@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > _______________________________________________ > 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
