OpenGeofiction
Recently, I have realized that many OSM features are ignored by the standard map layer. For example, Offices and Pipelines show up in JOSM, but they are completely invisible on openstreetmap.org itself. This makes sense in OSM because these features are insignificant, and most people don’t want to see them.
However, OGF is a different case. It doesn’t have “insignificant” features. Every node, line, and area is intentionally placed by the map creator, for aesthetics and realism.
Perhaps we should edit the Mapnik rendering rules in order to allow more features to be displayed? (A quick Google search makes it sound like it wouldn’t be too hard of a task, but I haven’t done it myself, so I apologize if I am wrong.)
Particularly, it would be nice if features like Offices were displayed, since they can make up a large portion of city buildings.
Discussion
Comment from Luciano on 3 July 2016 at 02:42
The “Standard Layer” is standard, and as such it is always going to be an exact copy of the OSM standard. However, you might be aware there is also the “Style by histor” (upper right on the map window, along with the “TopoMap” layer). I almost always use the histor layer, as it I have come to prefer it. Further, it is under “our” control. If you message user histor you could maybe convince him to change it to include those things. I too have noted the the “invisible features. I would very much like for “offices” to render, for example.
Comment from dryerlint on 3 July 2016 at 02:54
Oh, I didn’t even notice the Histor layer. Thanks for pointing that out! Yeah, I suppose the necessary changes could be made there, to preserve the style of the standard copy.
Comment from bhj867 on 3 July 2016 at 04:47
Along with that I would love for there to be a way to make the Forests seen from a high elevation. I wish we could see forested landscapes from zoom level 5 at the very least.
Comment from histor on 3 July 2016 at 07:50
Let me say it so: the standard-style in OGF is the standard-style of OSM. If OSM changed the design, the standard OGF will follow. Will you have an other style (p.e. the histor-style), this style then is to update at a style-changing by OSM. If not done, there then stay the old OGF-style with blue motorways etc.
The histor-style in first line is set for more different railway and harbour features and to show some symbols at lower zoom-level. If some other features are missed, let me know. In the past I noted, that a special colour is wished for freight-railway-tracks.
Comment from Leowezy on 3 July 2016 at 11:41
Every-day mapping, I usually use the standard layer, as I prefer the “new” colour scheme for the roads. Histor’s layer for me is, as he pointed out, great for any type of railroad work or public transportation in general. I have particularly noticed the “office” issue as well; I “solved” that issue by tagging government agencies etc. as tourist attractions, but I would love to have the office tag actually render non the less :)
Comment from Luciano on 3 July 2016 at 12:11
@Leowezy - that’s a good workaround. I tag my government offices as “amenity=courthouse” even for non-courthouses. And I have been tagging various sorts of NGOs and charities as “amenity=community_centre”. The pipeline issue is more of a problem. I had a really nice set of pipelines at one of my refineries, but it doesn’t show up on the render.
Comment from dryerlint on 3 July 2016 at 15:36
Same here, I usually tag Offices and other unrendered nodes as Tourist Attractions, since they have a “generic” appearance.
Yeah, the lack of pipelines is annoying. Perhaps they could just be tagged as paths, roads, or even railroads?
Comment from joschi81 on 3 July 2016 at 16:04
Well, there are people in OGF that are more or less “mapping for renderers” and those who map for a consistent fictional geo-database. I belong to the latter: If we want to use the OGF database (“hidden” behind the OGF map) later on for any type of geo analysis (which for me is an important goal, “fictional geo analysis”, haha), then we definetily should not map things with wrong tags only to show them within Mapnik style.
It is a pity that some features are not integrated for display in Mapnik. But: A consisten database and the original Mapnik layer as in OSM are important and we should not “break” these to basic features/rules of OGF. Rendering special features like pipelines should be part of a new layer. It would be nice also to have a transport layer. But these are wishes for the future (as we would need much more server capacity for this).
For the moment: Let’s stick to what we have. And let’s treat OGF as a large fictional GIS database - and not simply as a map.
Best regards joschi81
Comment from Luciano on 3 July 2016 at 22:41
@joschi81 - actually there is a point where I completely agree with your comment. However, the more time I have spent with OGF (and thus with the OSM standard), the more I have become aware that the OSM standard itself is not always well thought out or well designed, at least with respect to underlying GIS-type data.
As a result, my feelings have changed a bit - I think “tagging for the render,” is OK, with the following very big CAVEAT: I try to “overload” my tagging, with GIS (database) principles in mind. Thus, for my offices, the best thing to do is to tag BOTH for the render and for data integrity. Is this possible? On the one hand, I will use “amenity=courthouse” for the render. On the other hand, I don’t want to lose the data fact that these are government offices. So I use tags such as “operator=Gobierno de Tárrases” and “operator:type=government”. I also have gotten in the habit of adding my own “custom tags” (which I either prefix “ogf:” if I expect them to be used by other mappers or which I prefix “ldata:” if they’re probably only for my own use). Thus I could add “ldata:amenity=office”. The advantage of this is that if it ever happens that the render shows offices well, with all these tags I can very quickly and easily do a mass edit to change the tagging.
Comment from dryerlint on 3 July 2016 at 23:09
That does seem pretty reasonable, Luciano.
However, we should note that “tagging for the render” doesn’t have to be unrealistic or “cheaty”. For example, tagging a pipeline as a path: many pipelines in real life have paths alongside/over them.
Tagging offices as tourist attractions is a bit more unrealistic, though. Using both tags seems like the ideal solution.
Comment from Myrcia on 4 July 2016 at 07:10
I have to confess that I do ‘map for the render’. I use the Mapnik render and work with that.
I’m not interested or knowledgeable about GIS or mapping systems, I just want my city to look realistic so I can work with it to write wiki or draw transit maps. For example I tag all built-up areas (except industry) as landuse=residential as the uniform grey looks better than a mix of grey and two types of pink.
If I am mapping offices I use building=yes and then name=name because this renders well.