[OSM-talk] Too much detail, or: mapping every single tree

Thu Apr 29 06:40:37 UTC 2021

Regarding this abstract duscussion: the real problem with this, and similar
issues, who is going to maintain that enormous amount of data?

On Wed, 28 Apr 2021, 19:51 , <talk-request at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Send talk mailing list submissions to
>         talk at openstreetmap.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         talk-request at openstreetmap.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         talk-owner at openstreetmap.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of talk digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Too much detail, or: mapping every single tree in a park
>       (Dave F)
>    2. Re: Too much detail, or: mapping every single tree in a park
>       (James)
>    3. Re: Too much detail, or: mapping every single tree in a park
>       (john whelan)
>    4. Re: Too much detail, or: mapping every single tree in a park
>       (Mike Thompson)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 18:19:23 +0100
> From: Dave F <davefoxfac63 at btinternet.com>
> To: Skyler Hawthorne <osm at dead10ck.com>, osm-talk
>         <talk at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Too much detail, or: mapping every single tree
>         in a park
> Message-ID: <275ddbe9-2735-a92f-5a17-a2511c9bbf66 at btinternet.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
> Hi
>
> Looks good to me.
>
> If it's physical & stationary, it can be mapped. How much time & detail
> is up to the individual mapper.
>
> What would be good is if renderers could render the canopy of the trees
> branches based on a tag indicating roughly the diameter such as canopy=8.
>
> The speed of panning in an editor is annoying. Potlatch has a real
> problem with a town where all the houses are mapped as nodes.
> Surprisingly if they're mapped as complex polygons it has no problem
> zooming around.
>
> DaveF
>
>
>
> On 27/04/2021 04:02, Skyler Hawthorne wrote:
> > I came across this:
> >
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/42.71889/-73.78869
> >
> > And can't help but think that this serves no utility to anyone
> > whatsoever, and just takes up space and slows down map editors.
> >
> > I hesitate to destroy the effort of someone who clearly spent a
> > significant amount of time meticulously mapping each tree, but... at
> > the same, does it really help anyone to know where each individual
> > tree is in a park?
> >
> > Maybe I'm too pessimistic. What does everyone else think? Is there
> > such a thing as too much detail? Where do we draw the line?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > talk at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20210428/c8a19218/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:32:04 -0400
> From: James <james2432 at gmail.com>
> To: Dave F <davefoxfac63 at btinternet.com>
> Cc: Skyler Hawthorne <osm at dead10ck.com>, osm-talk
>         <talk at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Too much detail, or: mapping every single tree
>         in a park
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CANk4qi86oyyMcF8o8ytYsZFrDD-iTyvceoB_y+H5-CUZFjMKQw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I'm for mapping trees, it can have helpful information about trees:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/45.43369/-75.56387
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4958732118#map=19/45.43427/-75.56282
>
> and not just the tree location itself
>
> just because YOU don't use the data, doesn't mean OTHERS can't
>
> On Wed., Apr. 28, 2021, 1:25 p.m. Dave F via talk, <talk at openstreetmap.org
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > Looks good to me.
> >
> > If it's physical & stationary, it can be mapped. How much time & detail
> is
> > up to the individual mapper.
> >
> > What would be good is if renderers could render the canopy of the trees
> > branches based on a tag indicating roughly the diameter such as canopy=8.
> >
> > The speed of panning in an editor is annoying. Potlatch has a real
> problem
> > with a town where all the houses are mapped as nodes. Surprisingly if
> > they're mapped as complex polygons it has no problem zooming around.
> >
> > DaveF
> >
> >
> >
> > On 27/04/2021 04:02, Skyler Hawthorne wrote:
> >
> > I came across this:
> >
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/42.71889/-73.78869
> >
> > And can't help but think that this serves no utility to anyone
> whatsoever,
> > and just takes up space and slows down map editors.
> >
> > I hesitate to destroy the effort of someone who clearly spent a
> > significant amount of time meticulously mapping each tree, but... at the
> > same, does it really help anyone to know where each individual tree is
> in a
> > park?
> >
> > Maybe I'm too pessimistic. What does everyone else think? Is there such a
> > thing as too much detail? Where do we draw the line?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing listtalk at openstreetmap.orghttps://
> lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > talk at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20210428/1424b0b4/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 13:44:05 -0400
> From: john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>
> To: James <james2432 at gmail.com>
> Cc: Dave F <davefoxfac63 at btinternet.com>, osm-talk
>         <talk at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Too much detail, or: mapping every single tree
>         in a park
> Message-ID:
>         <CAJ-Ex1ESBqA0BCH_7A1C=
> WpjgRs4+LZVS3FLdsJZWcovHrv9QA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> It's cheaper to add a note saying in memory of than pay for plaque so as
> soon as they are planted this year by the City there will be half a
> dozen trees in Ottawa with such a note together with a park bench.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 13:36 James <james2432 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm for mapping trees, it can have helpful information about trees:
> >
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/45.43369/-75.56387
> >
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4958732118#map=19/45.43427/-75.56282
> >
> > and not just the tree location itself
> >
> > just because YOU don't use the data, doesn't mean OTHERS can't
> >
> > On Wed., Apr. 28, 2021, 1:25 p.m. Dave F via talk, <
> talk at openstreetmap.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Looks good to me.
> >>
> >> If it's physical & stationary, it can be mapped. How much time & detail
> >> is up to the individual mapper.
> >>
> >> What would be good is if renderers could render the canopy of the trees
> >> branches based on a tag indicating roughly the diameter such as
> canopy=8.
> >>
> >> The speed of panning in an editor is annoying. Potlatch has a real
> >> problem with a town where all the houses are mapped as nodes.
> Surprisingly
> >> if they're mapped as complex polygons it has no problem zooming around.
> >>
> >> DaveF
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 27/04/2021 04:02, Skyler Hawthorne wrote:
> >>
> >> I came across this:
> >>
> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/42.71889/-73.78869
> >>
> >> And can't help but think that this serves no utility to anyone
> >> whatsoever, and just takes up space and slows down map editors.
> >>
> >> I hesitate to destroy the effort of someone who clearly spent a
> >> significant amount of time meticulously mapping each tree, but... at the
> >> same, does it really help anyone to know where each individual tree is
> in a
> >> park?
> >>
> >> Maybe I'm too pessimistic. What does everyone else think? Is there such
> a
> >> thing as too much detail? Where do we draw the line?
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> talk mailing listtalk at openstreetmap.orghttps://
> lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> talk mailing list
> >> talk at openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > talk at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20210428/9f127d00/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 11:47:56 -0600
> From: Mike Thompson <miketho16 at gmail.com>
> To: James <james2432 at gmail.com>
> Cc: Dave F <davefoxfac63 at btinternet.com>, osm-talk
>         <talk at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Too much detail, or: mapping every single tree
>         in a park
> Message-ID:
>         <CALJoUks=
> 3qTS0Qm2sFcrK5UnHt-zqZ3i4VcWRZCoxMdKk0cYyg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I often map individual trees.  This information is useful, for example, to
> a hiker it says: "at this point in your hike you will come to a relatively
> open area with a few scattered trees" (useful as a navigational aid, and
> perhaps for selecting a campsite).
>
> Mike
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 11:36 AM James <james2432 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm for mapping trees, it can have helpful information about trees:
> >
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/45.43369/-75.56387
> >
> > https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4958732118#map=19/45.43427/-75.56282
> >
> > and not just the tree location itself
> >
> > just because YOU don't use the data, doesn't mean OTHERS can't
> >
> > On Wed., Apr. 28, 2021, 1:25 p.m. Dave F via talk, <
> talk at openstreetmap.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Looks good to me.
> >>
> >> If it's physical & stationary, it can be mapped. How much time & detail
> >> is up to the individual mapper.
> >>
> >> What would be good is if renderers could render the canopy of the trees
> >> branches based on a tag indicating roughly the diameter such as
> canopy=8.
> >>
> >> The speed of panning in an editor is annoying. Potlatch has a real
> >> problem with a town where all the houses are mapped as nodes.
> Surprisingly
> >> if they're mapped as complex polygons it has no problem zooming around.
> >>
> >> DaveF
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 27/04/2021 04:02, Skyler Hawthorne wrote:
> >>
> >> I came across this:
> >>
> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/42.71889/-73.78869
> >>
> >> And can't help but think that this serves no utility to anyone
> >> whatsoever, and just takes up space and slows down map editors.
> >>
> >> I hesitate to destroy the effort of someone who clearly spent a
> >> significant amount of time meticulously mapping each tree, but... at the
> >> same, does it really help anyone to know where each individual tree is
> in a
> >> park?
> >>
> >> Maybe I'm too pessimistic. What does everyone else think? Is there such
> a
> >> thing as too much detail? Where do we draw the line?
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> talk mailing listtalk at openstreetmap.orghttps://
> lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> talk mailing list
> >> talk at openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > talk at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20210428/948216c2/attachment.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of talk Digest, Vol 200, Issue 46
> *************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20210429/c5f07cb4/attachment-0001.htm>