[Design] Homepage - map layers

[Tom Hughes]

On 28/10/11 08:42, Jaakko Helleranta.com wrote:

> Having more tile choices at osm.org <http://osm.org> would be great.
> Could this perhaps be something that would highlight some "Best of OSM"
> in a new way: "Check out this Open MapQuest OSM style or this
> Cloudmade's Fresh -- or this newcomer style from HikeBikeMap".

The guidelines that we use when considering whether a tile layer is 
suitable for the home page can be found here:

   http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tile_Layer_Guidelines

There is also a list of proposed layers here:

   http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Featured_tiles

Note that adding a layer to that page does not trigger a formal 
consideration of the the layer - for that you would need to make a 
specific proposal to the Operations Working Group who would then 
consider it in line with the above policy.

> To articulate better:
> I'd like to see the handful of best tiles with global coverage be added
> to OSM.org in a way or another. Ideally there would be some simple
> explanation on what each specific tiles are especially good for. E.g.
> - Mapnik: a comprehensive generic use map style that tries to show as
> much as possible in an eye-pleasing way.
> - OpenCycleMap: Targeted for the cyclists as well as other light traffic
> and pedestrians. Includes contours.
> - Open MapQuest: Simple style that doesn't show many details, which
> makes it an excellent base map for many use cases.
> - Cloudmade's Fresh
> - Cloudmade's Midnight commander: "Night vision tiles"
> - Cloudmade's Fine line: simple "road map" style
> - HikeBikeMap: Beautiful :)
> - what else?

None of those have been formally proposed so far (other than the ones 
which are already there of course) and I can see several there which 
would probably have trouble meeting the policy requirements.

I would also note that there is something of a conflict between adding 
new layers and the request from earlier in this thread to make 
additional layers more discoverable, in that doing so will risk driving 
more traffic to the sites meaning that we will need to be more careful 
about assessing which sites are able to support the load.

> I'd also _love_ to see (Bing) imagery as a layer + a
> imagery+transparent_osm layer as options. This is clearly something that
> no one at OSM can choose but would it be (a) desired and (b) possible to
> get some partner to make this possible?

Obviously this would be lovely from an aesthetic point of view but 
suffers from the problem of needing somebody to provide us with access 
to imagery that we are allowed to use in that way.

It also somewhat conflicts with the point of view that the web site is 
not intended to be an Google Maps style end user web mapping site, but 
rather is there to assist in encouraging people to help us collect and 
improve our data set - our data is our product, not a slick end user web 
map.

> And could someone, e.g. Bing, help make OSM search better? (I really
> don't care what URL that would happen at. Ideally at osm.org
> <http://osm.org>.)

If you want to make search better then help make our search tools, which 
use our data, better. Don't just tack on third party search. We want to 
drop the third party engines we currently use, not add to them.

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/