[talk-au] Talk-au Digest, Vol 97, Issue 2 Huts
warren at specialtyfeeds.com.au
Mon Jul 20 04:02:26 UTC 2015
I would also like to input into this discussion.
From the point of view of a user of one of the renditions of OSM maps I
can see the point that the huts be labelled as Alpine Huts.
In Western Australia we do not do Alpine but we do have huts. It would
be nice to have the huts on the Bibbulmun track marked, currently they
seem to be marked as toilets at best.
Can we redefine Alpine to mean any remote hut?
On 18/07/2015 8:00 PM, talk-au-request at openstreetmap.org wrote:
> Send Talk-au mailing list submissions to
> talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> talk-au-request at openstreetmap.org
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> talk-au-owner at openstreetmap.org
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Talk-au digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> 1. Re: High country huts (forster at ozonline.com.au)
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2015 10:14:02 +1000
> From: forster at ozonline.com.au
> To: Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com>
> Cc: talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [talk-au] High country huts
> Message-ID: <20150718101402.lvcc4mxbcowkw0sw at webmail2.ozonline.com.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes";
> Thanks Warin for the reply.
> wilderness_hut should not cause map clutter because they should only
> be tagged in wilderness areas which by definition are largely empty of
> man made features
> but I accept that getting their zoom level changed may be difficult
> so continue to tag as basic hut in NSW and alpine hut in Victoria?
>> On 4/07/2015 6:24 PM, forster at ozonline.com.au wrote:
>>> I am new to editing.
>>> I have noticed inconsistency in what are known in Australia as
>>> Alpine or High Country or Mountain Cattlemen's huts.
>>> In Victoria they are tagged tourism=alpine_hut (see Bogong High
>>> Plains, Mt Sterling and Lake Mountain)
>>> In the NSW they are tagged as shelter_type=basic_hut. (see the
>>> Snowy Mountains, [except that you can't easily see them, eg Whites
>>> River Hut, Schlink Hilton, Tin Hut])
>>> I would consider retagging the Victorian huts to basic_hut or
>>> wilderness_hut but there is a serious safety issue involved. I am
>>> aware that I should not tag for Mapnik but downgrading the hut
>>> status would be very risky for map users.
>>> alpine_hut displays in Mapnik at zoom 13 but basic_hut displays at
>>> zoom 16. It is practically impossible to find a basic_hut with
>>> scroll and zoom, even if you know roughly where it is. I guess this
>>> is why Victorian huts are tagged alpine_hut.
>>> These huts are the single most important feature in Australian alpine areas.
>>> Ideally I would like to see basic_hut or wilderness_hut displaying
>>> at zoom 13, there is heaps of empty space, at least in Australian
>>> maps round these huts, then I would like to see the Victorian huts
>>> Your thoughts?
>> Unfortunately rendering 'rules' are world wide ...
>> Meaning if basic_hut or wilderness_hut displaying were displayed at
>> zoom 13 somewhere in the world there would be too much clutter for the
>> map to be usefull.
>> Personally I'd like to see these 'rules' being made fuzzy ... so in
>> places where little is shown things can be brought forward. Probably
>> best implemented the other way around, removing things untill the
>> number of things displayed per unit area is suitably small for reading,
>> but large enough for detail.
>> Talk-au mailing list
>> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
>> This mail has been virus scanned by Australia On Line
>> see http://www.australiaonline.net.au/mailscanning
> Subject: Digest Footer
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> End of Talk-au Digest, Vol 97, Issue 2
More information about the Talk-au