[OSM-talk-be] Where to suggest/discuss the renderer?

[Karel Adams]

Glenn, hebt ge me wel goed gelezen?

There is not the slightest need to convince me we should not map for the 
renderer. There's a bunch of mappers, especially in France but also one 
in Italy, who vehemently remove the "aeroway=aerodrome" tag from small 
airfields. When I reinstate it, they will promptly remove it and send me 
angry messages.

I do not say they are right, I do say there is some reason to their 
approach. It is not acceptable that the renderer knows only one category 
of aerodrome so that it maps a small recreational aerodrome the same way 
as an international airport. This should be improved in the renderer, 
both to satisfy those Southern grumblers even if they're not right; but 
mainly to improve the map that we produce.

It is not because they are wrong in France that there is no room for 
improving the renderer. Whence my repeated question: where or with whom 
can this be discussed?

KA

PS one thing I have begun to do is to tag those small fields as 
"aeroway=airstrip" but that is not to everybody's liking, either.


On 22/02/18 09:41, Glenn Plas wrote:
> Mapping for the renderer is de facto wrong and what you experience now
> (in france etc.) is the endresult of that attitude.  I don't understand
> why you get discouraged on OSM because of a map you don't like.   It's
> like saying:  "I don't contribute to Wikipedia anymore because when I
> print a page out, it's not aligned the way I want it."
>
> There are several options for anyone in your situation:
>
> 1. make your own map.  There are several sites that allow you to make
> custom maps.
> 2. more technical: copy cartoCSS, change whatever you want, set up a
> tile server and enjoy your perfectly suited map
> 3. try to change the consensus, lobby for universal solution, try to get
> the standard cartoCSS changed to your likings (and repeat later when
> someone else does the same)
> 4. Look for existing map alternatives  (different renderings)
>
> You should realise that it has nothing to do with the source data.
> There are already ton's of different map rendering out there, perhaps
> one will be perfect for you.
>
> Don't stop mapping because of someone elses decision to represent a
> feature in a way that doesn't appeal to you.  It's the worst reason to
> stop as that might just change in an instant.
>
> Glenn
>
>
> On 19-01-18 16:43, Karel Adams wrote:
>> When I first consulted maps - paper-only, at that time, of course -
>> the famous Michelin 1:200000 had distinct symbols for (bigger)
>> airports, (smaller) airfields, and glider fields. As of 2018, the
>> generic map of openstreetmap has only a single icon to represent
>> anything mapped with "aeroway:aerodrome" - and all of them rendered as
>> from zoomlevel=13 - and none below.
>>
>> This is really very bad. Why should I want to contribute to a system
>> that delivers poorer info than paper maps of 50 years old?
>>
>> Even worse, many active and able mappers are reluctant to update the
>> database properly because the correct info will be so poorly rendered.
>> Especially in France and Italy, where I had endless arguments with
>> people removing the "aeroway=aerodrome" tag from real proper
>> aerodromes, because they didn't want their local grass runway mapped
>> the same as CDG Roissy airport. Even if I don't agree, I can fully
>> understand their point of view!
>>
>> What is the proper place to question this matter, and discuss schemes
>> of improvement? Is there a discussion site for the renderer?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
>
>