Ūdilugbulgidħū has commented on the following diary entries
|Random Names||4 months ago||
There are certain rules that the names of real world countries follow, mostly relating to grammar and 'how the name sounds'. The majority of country names are not too difficult to pronounce. They follow the grammatical rules of the language the country speaks, and where there is more than one language spoken, there can be more than one official name. Therefore, for countries, verisimilitude won't happen when a country name breaks these rules.
Think about this in relation to some of the countries in OGF, there are clearly a few issues.
|Creating custom UFT-8 characters for OGF languages that dosen't use any RW script.||4 months ago||
The OSM/OGF map uses Unicode blocks to render fonts. Only fonts that are supported by the OSM will be rendered. The number has increased over the years, and now most are usable, but still I think some rare Unicode won't be rendered.
It is fairly easy to design a font - though time-consuming, of course. Fontstruct is as good a site as any for doing this. Fonts can be made up of multiple characters, saved as a TrueType font, shared and used to write text in most programs.
But as I understand it unless those fonts get encoded to Unicode, they currently can't be rendered in the OGF map.
|Country Name Suggestions||5 months ago||
Woodland isn't a terrible name in English. At least, not as grating as some of the ones that exist already: a country calling itself 'Pretanic Faction State'? or 'Peaceland'? or the one absolutely no-one will be able to pronounce: 'Buildtion'?
|Mysterious monarchy||5 months ago||
These are all issues we have if we want to think about 'unconventional' countries. So, I can understand there being some sort of devotion to a religious or cultural tradition on behalf of both the aristocrats and the rest of the people. In isolation, that works very well, love it.
The challenge is to make the 'modern' 'real world' elements fit in as well. Some random thoughts: how/when, for example, was the Řotsnan alphabet introduced - and what was used before, if anything? How was modern infrastructure introduced, industry, economics, western sports? These seem to be - at least partially - in conflict with traditions of the codex? (but I'm not sure how relevant that is) How do you explain that conflict gradually resolved - and some sort of tension must obviously still exist? How did immigration - or emigration - affect the attitudes and perceptions of the people? How strong is a law that aims prevent the use of drones by some people (but authorises others)?
In the real world, the development of western thought, social structures/traditions and technology are interwoven, and when these have come into contact with other societies I can hardly think of an example where there hasn't been - or still is - conflict. Řotsnan law and democracy is clearly going to be a bit different...
|Mysterious monarchy||5 months ago||
The situation of the monarchy in Řots seems to be an elaborate deception by the government and/or people of Řots. So my question first would be why: why does the government want the monarchy/aristocracy to think that things haven't changed for hundreds of years? If you can answer this, my second question would be : how does the government/people see this as ethical? Are human rights applicable in Řots and, if they are, is the aristocracy discriminated against? Does the aristocracy have different rights to the people? If they have, how is this justified? Ignoring the codex, what is the basis of law in Řots?
In the real world monarchies have - at least historically - tried to hold on to power. That's been logical, since the alternative is often violent. Because monarchies are hierarchical power structures usually the top of the pyramid has the advantage, in terms of influence and knowledge, as well as wealth, military control and the other more ostensible trappings of power. Perhaps the answer to how the aristocracy of Řots became estranged from knowledge of what's going on in the rest of the country is the core question. You might expect that any moderately intelligent aristo would work things out for themselves and either rebel, defect or submit to legal or democratic process?
I do see parallels with various self-deluding sects, religions or extreme groups around the world - and that could apply to the aristocracy themselves, of course.
However, its harder to understand why the people of Řots let the situation go on like this. If the monarchy has no real power, why would anyone bother with them? In an ostensibly democratic country, would people really avoid the highway on the day that the king comes to town? Surely it would be impossible to cloak the views from the hilltops, the powerline crossings, the aircraft and the noise of traffic in the distance - pretty soon an aristo out of their stately home would work things out - and take this to the king? For the monarch's visit, will everyone's phone be confiscated? What if some random flies a drone over the monarchical procession? Mental denial by the monarchy could possibly explain it, but wouldn't (some of) the people object to a government policy that supported this?
So, I get the connection between the codex and brainwashing - which could be a parallel with some extremist states - but why would the people of a democratic country, which 'the rest' of Řots seems to be, want this to happen?
|Gardensa: changes in the map (Verisimilitude).||6 months ago||
Useful discussion - please continue any discussion in the forum here so that we can come back to it in future.
|How terrorism is in OGF?||7 months ago|
|Trouble with an OSM file||7 months ago||
Luciano is dead right on working on previously uploaded datasets, though I can't tell if this is the cause of your troubles. The workaround may be to copy & paste the stuff you mapped and couldn't upload to a new layer, then clean this layer up and upload it. You will lose all the relations, but the detail of what you've drawn will probably still be ok. If there are going to be conflicts (i.e. duplicates) you'll have to manually merge objects for the two areas and remove these (the validator will do most of this work for you, like removing isolated nodes or duplicate ways). That may be easier than redrawing everything.
|Your thoughts about my new capital city ?||8 months ago||
If you post this on the form page - here (using the "add new topic" button) we will be much more able to give long term feedback to each other. It looks like your city is in early stages of being mapped. Bon chance, Udi
|New stats: Ideas||8 months ago||
The main issues with the wiki:
My preference would be to delete all lists that don't serve a genuine collaborative purpose.
The lack of structure means that creativity is not encouraged.
Taking data direct from the map to link consistently to the wiki pages should be a priority for development - for anyone who can do that sort of thing. I think we could include all relevant data for a country on the country node on the map and link that to any wiki lists. When the node is deleted, automatically the country is removed from list.
Btw Alessa - thanks for sorting out my categories the other day!
|Map of the languages of the World||8 months ago||
I've some sympathy with you wanting to make this but unfortunately, at this time in OGF, I think its a bad idea.
There are many reasons not to try and get all the 'main languages' on one map, as explained above, but I think the main one is that OGF is in a state of constant flux and that your effort is likely both to be wasted and to waste other people's time. Either way, if you do use colour codes for different language groups, use the ones on the OGF:Language families page, which are standardised with individual language templates.
I don't recommend trying to do that, but what I suggest you could do is to add a map along these lines to wiki pages on a single language, for example on the page on Ingerish.
However, I think that putting effort into the wiki of outside of your own country's page is generally pointless. The only exceptions to this might be to develop international collaboration, for example on the international business page. Developing other similar pages to this could help consistency between countries and build realistic connections between countries.
Incidentally, having an 'Ingerish' Empire seems rather incredible, since the Ingerland of OGF seems to have few of the advantages the real England had. This world is very different, especially spatially.
I'd advise you to focus on mapping in your own country. Feasibly, as Luciano illustrates, you could have this number of languages one country reflected in place names, features, etc. Conlanging solves the problem of tying these in with other countries in ways which are scarcely believable and, in fact you don't need to develop a whole language to do this in a convincing way. For one language you probably need some standard rules and around 200 main words, which you can re-use and add to over time.
|Public competition||9 months ago||
You don't need the underpasses. The southern one, remove it and you can just use the roundabout. The north east one, just add another roundabout.
|Verisimilitude on a global level: on the ever-growing number of small States||9 months ago||
If that's the biggest problem, why not find more admin team members?
|Verisimilitude on a global level: on the ever-growing number of small States||9 months ago||
I agree with pretty much everything that's been said above. These things are not resolvable in OGF: the focus of mapping needs to be small because otherwise practically no-one will have time to do it. It works fine as countries, because that way people have some ownership, but of course it isn't like the real world. "States" might be a possibility - if people have a similar shared concept, but we know, that hasn't worked so far. There is certainly amazing stuff here but also a lot of experiments, places where people try different things out. And of course everyone needs a place to start, to practice and learn.
We talked somewhere a long time ago about possible solutions to the different qualities of mapping. With the permission of its creators, the data that is in OGF could be recombined in different configurations (after all, it is just numbers). That way you could end up with some larger countries that are actually coherent. Isleño has been doing this for a long time, moving abandoned things to Commonia and other blue countries. But on a bigger scale it might be possible to design a world around these compound areas (or countries), rather than trying to fit countries into a pre-designed world which itself is not logical or "realistic". As Aces says, with a will, I suppose you could do some of this in OGF already ... but I'm not sure it would result in much long term improvement. Maybe one or two bigger/better countries, but they would probably end up mixed in with semi-abandoned small ones.
There's a slightly different problem with there being too many rich countries, but its perhaps not as big a problem as it seems. There is a logical explanation after all: the poor countries don't have access to the time to spend mapping this, or even the real OSM, so those places are not mapped to the same detail. Conceivably, you should be putting more detail into a country the better off it is and the more citizens it has with access to mapping software. Perhaps the "new continents" just don't have internet... Anyway, at the moment the more constructive thing is to focus on creating good bits of mapping, even if they are small and disjointed.
|Mapping suburban areas||9 months ago||
In theory, development of a suburb would be linked to two main components: natural features (especially topography) and sociological features (including economics and planning rules and the relative location of the main urban area). So I'd approach it first by designing the topography. Uneven topography would make your map more interesting, but the flatter it is, the easier it would be to map. Its a compromise, but adding in a few basic features - like a river with woods along it - might really help it look interesting. When you have your sociological ideas and timeline in your imagination you could then move to implementing the results of sociological interactions on the map.
So much for the theory...
If you just want it to look like somewhere in the real wold, without taking any of this into account, its not a problem, but be careful when extrapolating back to what you have mapped. If you don't understand why things are laid out in a particular way, and then you try and fit them into your imagined culture, it may not work. Then if you add another bit of mapping based on somewhere else - which you also only partly understand - it will just look wrong. Perhaps that's what has been happening here.
For Iction, which of course is rural rather than suburban, the map incorporates development over time, around 1000 years. The imagined process is slow, but accelerates in the 20th century. Therefore, there is as much mapped development from the last 100 years as in the previous 900. For your suburb, it might be much easier than this since all your development could have occurred in say, 10 years. So you can get away with copying and pasting buildings, because they'll all be very similar. In your case, the interface between the agricultural/rural and the urban is most likely to have been decided by the planners - but how did the planners envisage the suburb, why did they put it there? What demarcates the boundary between the rural and the urban - is it a fixed boundary, perhaps a park or natural feature, or is it temporary, with consideration of space for future expansion? Are there any relicts of earlier landuse, natural or built?
I think imagining who the planning architect was and why they designed things like that could really help.
|Weekly Word; Hot Challenge||10 months ago||
I'm honestly not sure I deserved to win that, but thanks for the honour! I've looked at the other entries and they were all quality, many parts of bigger projects. I think it would be absolutely fair that things added to these areas - as long as they tie in with the weekly word - could be submitted for future challenges.
Mickle icton took a while to map, and the harder part was developing the 'interface' between rural and urban. If you want some tips on what might work, just ask.
I like the word for this challenge and it's giving me some ideas, but I've no time to map at the moment.
Happy mapping Udi
|We are now on Wikipedia!||10 months ago||
To be recognised 'outside OGF', mappers have to make an impact outside OGF. The decision was made on Wikipedia that OGF wasn't a big enough thing to have its own page.Therefore setting up new pages is counter-productive and a waste of the wiki editors time. If you want a wiki page, it needs referenced; for that to happen you need to produce quality mapping that gets recognised more widely. No more comments here, please - get back to mapping!
|Weekly Word; Pheonix Edition||10 months ago||
I'm sort of confused about what is an entry and what isn't. This is Mickle Iction - a fairly minor rural place, in spite of the name.
|What could be the best and most worked on location in OGF?||10 months ago||
If you think somewhere in OGF is good, then please nominate it. There's absolutely no problem nominating your own map, though it may not get featured until it's fully developed.
|highway=pedestrian relations disappeared?||10 months ago||
These need to be set as multipolygon relations. Set the outer way of the area to be displayed within the highway=pedestrian multipolygon as "inner" in the relation. Or select both and CTRL + B is your friend.