[Theme] OS Map

[twoten]

I'm using Great-Britain_oam.osm downloaded from Mapsforge.
I'm viewing the map using Oruxmaps.

Hmm... I've installed Oruxmaps, installed my theme, downloaded great britian map fro OAM and managed to repeat your issue.

I wonder what the issue is... could be my theme, the map, an unsupported rendering engine command...

Attached is a zoomed invoice view. It is the cliff edge that is wrong. There seems to be the black line in both, but the pattern filled line of cliff texture is solid black in Oruxmaps.

I'm using linesymbol with a rock texture, perhaps linesymbol is not supported in Oruxnaps...?

This line only appears with the latest version of your theme. It was OK with the previous version.

[karlchick]

Do you count designated=foot as a PROW? Should highway=bridleway be recognised as a PROW? Also designated=horse?

In the OS Map theme I use green(25k)/pink(50k) dashes to indicate what could be assumed to be PROW. Ideally this would be based purely on the designation tag and four main values (I still need to work on the other values used for Scotland and IOM).

However, not all PROW are fully mapped yet, so there are additional rules which can be  included using the accessible paths and designated paths options, as described in simplified rule form above. There are quite a few rules used in fact to decide if a path is likely a PROW.

It's the best compromise I have come up with using the data available and also providing OAM maps with similar results.

Highway=bridleway is shown as a green long dashes, but not highlighted as such. I was going to include them in the PROW highlighting but wanted to encourage the use and completion of the designation tag. By only using the designation tag for highlighting, it also allows you to know if a way is a real PROW and not an assumed PROW. Of course, I am assuming that the designation tags are correctly tagged PROW, which is their intended use.

Regarding the pylons/powering, I don't think I changed these in this release. They are designed to mimic the OS map, but do enlarge as zooming in. Thanks for the feedback, I'll consider improvements for the next release.

[karlchick]

This line only appears with the latest version of your theme. It was OK with the previous version.

I've tracked this down to a change to use the darker night cliff texture for 1:50k maps to closer match OS maps. But it seems that Oruxmaps is filling the background of the transparent PNG with black, in the fixed example above I reverted 1:50k to use the day texture and it works.

I will look at the masked areas used in the PNG texture files and see if there is something causing this. Odd that LocusMap doesn't fill in the background for the same PNG image.

[john_percy]

With "Dynamic" I can get black and green dashes interfering but Explorer and Landranger are perfectly ok.
You cannot view this attachment.

[karlchick]

Thanks John, it seems to relate to when "accessible paths" option is used. Found, I made the dashes larger but missed some for this option. It starts to get difficult to spot errors in 14,637 lines of rules!

[john_percy]

When accessible footpaths is off, Landranger doesn't show all the paths that Dynamic does at zooms where the Landranger style is used.
When accessible paths is off, Explorer shows paths as black dashes which are replaced by green dashes when accessible paths is turned on. When the same test is done with Dynamic, the black dashes have green dashes overlaid.

[karlchick]

When accessible footpaths is off, Landranger doesn't show all the paths that Dynamic does at zooms where the Landranger style is used.
When accessible paths is off, Explorer shows paths as black dashes which are replaced by green dashes when accessible paths is turned on.

This is correct behaviour, Landranger maps only show PROW and not other footpaths. If you select accessible or designated path then what is assumed to be a PROW is widened to include these too, although they will not be highlighted as PROW if they are not designated using designation tag...

Note: Landranger theme uses black dashes for cycleways, bit of a compromise as original OS maps don't show cycleways but if the cycleway is a visible track they are often shown as vague black dashed lines alongside other features...

Hope that's not too confusing...

[karlchick]

Thank you everyone for feedback and bugs found so far, I very much appreciate it and will work on these to get a fixed release out ASAP. Attached is my fix list so far.

[karlchick]

Had a busy evening, managed to draft fixes for all the issues reported so far.

I've loaded a draft version with fixes here:

    OS Map v20231203 Draft1.zip

I've not updated the legends or release notes yet, will do that for a proper release.

Changes made are:
- reduced heavy pylons at high zoom levels.
- fixed issues causing Oruxmap to not display many elements correctly.
- added option enabled by default "show symbols earlier" to allow reduced clutter in cities.
- fixed dynamic view of footpath dashes green/black out of sync
- moved surface highlights to below the highways to avoid obscuring the surface texture and street names.

BTW, the issue with Oruxmaps was down to case sensitivity of filenames in theme vs actual filenames. Seems Windows likes to capitalise the first letter by default. Have renamed all files to lowercase now.

Please try out the new draft and I'll all be very grateful of any feedback, thanks in advance.

[karlchick]

I'm considering adding some unicode icons to the overlay menus to help visually group similar options together. 

What do you think of the attached example?

TBH, I was struggling to find useful symbols for the lower down options... may change them to colours instead...

[twoten]

I'm considering adding some unicode icons to the overlay menus to help visually group similar options together. 

What do you think of the attached example?

TBH, I was struggling to find useful symbols for the lower-down options... may change them to colours instead...

What happens if you don't group them?

I have tried the draft version in Oruxmaps and it looks good thank you.

Some of the footpaths that run alongside some minor roads are marked as a dotted line where they're not shown on the  Ordnance Survey maps. Is it possible to deselect these without affecting other public footpaths?

[karlchick]

Some of the footpaths that run alongside some minor roads are marked as a dotted line where they're not shown on the  Ordnance Survey maps. Is it possible to deselect these without affecting other public footpaths?

By dotted I suspect you mean thinner black dashes? These are footpaths that are classified as accessible to the public. But not defined (or assumed) as PROW.

In theory, according to the OSM tagging rules, you should be able to use these footpaths, but clearly you should observe local signage.

OS maps do show some of these as black dashes too, or very often as dashed tracks or indistinct dashed lines next to other boundary features.

It is possible to add a option "show non-PROW paths" if you wanted to untick it remove then. Not sure it's worth having... is there a particular reason to remove them? I'd hazard a guess at lots of urban pathways cluttering up the map?

One thing the consider is that quite a few paths exist but are not yet tagged with designation tag, and many paths in the UK are ancient rights of way that are not registered and may be lost. The UK government are trying to impose a deadline to get them registered or lost forever. Deadline was 2026, now moved to 2031. There is an online map of potential missing footpaths, can't find it at the moment..., but if a footpath is not registered but in regular use it could be registered as a PROW. Footpaths like this should/could exist in OSM as we are supposed to map what is visible on the ground... so rather than remove these from the map, how about checking if they are lost PROW and getting the registered?

[karlchick]

What happens if you don't group them?

Nothing, I just added the icons to the existing menu, I thought perhaps it might make it quicker to locate options in the list by colour.

Attached is a slight improvement? 

🟢 hiking options (25k PROW colour)
🟠 cycling options (25k circle colour)
🟣 mtb bike options (25k circle colour)
🟤 urban options (urban area colour)
⚪ road options
⚫ non-OS options
🔆 = highlight/emphasise options

[karlchick]

I've uploaded a copy of the theme with the colour icons added to the menus. Wondering if you find it an improvement or not. I'm going to try it out for a bit and then revert to no icons and see if I miss them.

    OS Map v20231203 Draft2.zip

No other changes since Draft1, but will appreciate any feedback on whether you think this is useful... Karl.

[Andrew Heard]

Certainly for the main categories of hiking, cycling, MTB, their associated color is a good reminder of the color to look out for on the map instead of needing the legend. Unlike @tapios icons, I don't find the other ones visually as useful.