Messages

1

Locus Map (4+) / Re: Locus Map 4, discussion

« on: July 25, 2020, 10:23:52 »

Does auto update not work on your phone, or do you choose not to use it?

Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

2

Locus Map (4+) / Re: Locus Map 4, discussion

« on: July 25, 2020, 06:14:11 »

As far as I can see, the fact that they share the same id means that Google play store offers you updated versions of lm3free if you have lm4 alpha.


Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

3

Wishlist / Re: Map legend shortcut vor vector maps

« on: July 21, 2020, 18:45:03 »

@voldapet
I had in mind the html page that I find in the app by a long tap on the internal Locus v3 themes in recent versions. I've only just realised it is exactly the same as online knowledge base page and is consequently not what I would want starting from scratch. 

4

Wishlist / Re: Map legend shortcut vor vector maps

« on: July 17, 2020, 13:23:02 »

This functionality is fine.
I've got somewhat frustrated at trying to set up responsive HTML pages for the legend for my themes. I seem to have forgotten a fair bit of my HTML and got left behind in current developments.
I like the look of the Locus version 3 key. Is there any way to make that available as a template?


Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

5

Troubles & Questions / Re: Open access land vs private land on England Lomap

« on: July 08, 2020, 09:07:09 »

AFAIK the underlying map data from Openstreetmap does not record Open Access Land in England so neither LoMaps not OAM maps can display it.
There is an Ordnance Survey type theme available for Locus that mimics the OS display of Open Access Land but the areas it marks are not actually open access as far as I can see.
Also, to clarify, land being open access does not make wild camping legal in England and Wales without the permission of the land owner. (You might be more likely to get away with it there however.)

Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

6

Locus Map (4+) / Re: Locus Map 4, discussion

« on: July 06, 2020, 09:27:05 »

@menion Would you like one of my photos to try? I think they are all from my phone camera so it might be worthwhile to check if there is something odd with them?

Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

7

Locus Map (4+) / Re: Locus Map 4, discussion

« on: July 05, 2020, 13:57:38 »

Something seems to have gone wrong with LoPoints display in this alpha. If I tap the eye icon to turn it on in the map content fly out menu, nothing changes on the map, and if I open that menu again the eye is not shown as turned on.

This is true for POIs from both LoMaps and OAM.

Edit: And now it's OK again.

8

Locus Map (4+) / Re: Locus Map 4, discussion

« on: June 30, 2020, 13:45:54 »

@menion
Photos are from phone camera, stored in normal phone folder. Either "new photo point" or simple discovery by Locus has the same result. But works fine on version 3. And one or two of my camera photos work fine in version 4.


Screenshots show pop up detail panel and result of tapping on the jpg icon.
Additional screenshot is from version 3.

9

Locus Map (4+) / Re: Locus Map 4, discussion

« on: June 30, 2020, 12:15:43 »

In latest V4 beta, mid sized thumbnails for geotagged photos still usually return generic jpg icon, unlike in version 3. I'm not sure if that was supposed to be fixed, according to release notes.
(That's when tapping on small thumbnail picture on map and getting details screen appearing at bottom of screen. Tapping on jpg icon then gives correct large image.)


Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

10

Locus Map (4+) / Re: Locus Map 4, discussion

« on: June 28, 2020, 23:58:15 »

In dark mode:
1. Search text entered in Settings is almost unreadable with very low contrast
2. What is the intention for the icons for vector map themes in dark mode. Should I redesign the icon for my theme so it works against a dark background as well as a light one, or will it be automatically inverted in due course, or will there need to be two variants of icon for each theme?

Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

11

Themes - Vector maps / Re: Matching tags which did not match a previous rule?

« on: June 27, 2020, 17:24:49 »

@poutnikl Thanks for that info!

Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

12

Themes - Vector maps / Re: Matching tags which did not match a previous rule?

« on: June 27, 2020, 16:09:26 »

I must admit I have never met surface=smooth_paved yet.
I would rather expect surface=paved|asphalt  and smoothness=excellent|very_good|good

To use your terms, surface=smooth_paved seems to me like an anarchic tagging :-)

Most routers, definitely all BRouter profiles I am aware of, would consider it as unpaved, as the tagvalue smooth_paved is not among listed paved values they use to determine pavedness.

Sent from my Xiaomi MI A2 / Android 10, via Tapatalk

OAM processes surface="smooth_paved"
See https://www.openandromaps.org/wp-content/snippets/makes/tagmapping-min.xml


Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

13

Themes - Vector maps / Re: Matching tags which did not match a previous rule?

« on: June 27, 2020, 15:44:13 »

I think the only way is to have a rule that matches all the alternative values of surface.
Karl.

The problem with this is that a due to the anarchic nature of OSM, all the values of surface are not known are they?

However not all the anarchic tags make their way into the final map. OAM for example has a list of which tags and values are processed into their maps.

Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

14

Themes - Vector maps / Re: Matching tags which did not match a previous rule?

« on: June 27, 2020, 15:42:22 »

You would think so, but the Mapsforge interpreter used that illogical and non standard way to pick up everything not included in the previous match.
It's not the only illogicality in the matching. If you match on k="a|b" then nest a match on k="a" it will also match on k="b" as the results of the previous match are cached as it were.
I don't guarantee it still works like that.

Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

15

Themes - Vector maps / Re: Matching tags which did not match a previous rule?

« on: June 27, 2020, 14:41:50 »

Something like the following was supposed to work at one stage but I'm not sure it is correct or bug free:

Code: [Select]

<rule e="way" k="surface" v="smooth_paved">
<line stroke="#AAAAAA" stroke-width="0.9" stroke-dasharray="2,2" stroke-linecap="butt" />
</rule>
<rule e="way" k="surface" v="*|~">
<!-- value matches everything *else* or nothing -->
....I know that is pretty non-standard!