Messages

Hi Everyone,

A big thank you to everyone that tried out the recent v20231013 release (it contained a lot of changes I have made over the last 2.75 years!) and thank you everyone for kindly reporting back to me the bugs/issues and things that could be improved further.

I've incorporated the changes and have just updated the sticky "[Theme] OS Map" topic thread with the latest release (see post #1 for updated release notes and details).

I'm hoping I can get this version of the theme into the Locus Map store to make it easier to download and install soon.

I've just uploaded the latest release of the OS Map theme (v20231218) which now includes fixes and updates for many issues you all reported to me. A very big thank you to all for reporting your findings, I hope this release will be OK enough to finally release into the Locus Map store, my next task.

Here is a list of the changes in this latest release:

• Removed residential roads from filled in residential areas at zoom level 12.
• Removed unused categories and tidied up style menu definitions
• Added colour icons to style menus to indicate options by colour groups, green=hiking, orange=cycling, purple=mtb, brown=urban, black=roads, white=non-OS.
• Added option "Show symbols earlier" so you can have less symbol intrusion at Z15 and lower, useful in urban/city areas.
• Added option "Building names earlier" so you can have more building namers appear earlier from Z16 onwards.
• Added option "emphasise all sealed roads too" so you can selectively also highlight ALL roads that are sealed, or disable (if you prefer a less distracting urban view).
• Added footpath names visible from Z16.
• Changed "surface textures" options to also include all steps, footpaths and bridleways.
• Changed option "road surface/grade textures" to "surface textures" to be shorter menu entry.
• Changed option "emphasise road surface/grade textures" to "emphasise surface textures" to be shorter menu entry.
• Changed size of covered reservoir symbol at Z13/Z14 to be smaller.
• Changed unclassified roads to appear from Z12 (was Z13).
• Changed smaller service roads to appear from Z13 (was Z12).
• Changed 50k pylons to be smaller at high zoom levels.
• Changed place name priorities to work better.
• Fixed missing bridges casings at Z13/Z14.
• Fixed symbol/pattern filenames to be have matching cases in both theme and filing system - enables theme to work correctly with OruxMaps.

But also, l purposely keep the number of options to a minimum and thought that "drive on left/right" choice for just one particular scenario was too much.

Yes, especially as it's two options that should be mutually exclusive.

I have got the two options for cycle lanes. But also use them for placing OS style road numbers alongsode dual carriage ways on the correct side depending on whether left/right hand traffic direction. Otherwise the road numbers appear in the central reservation for one of the conventions.

Also I tweak the symbol for post boxes, left hand drive uses red circles (like a plan view of our red pillar post box) and right hand drive uses square yellow box (like continental post boxes).


But, my OP was concerned with why LoMap and OAM render differently. Not checked the rules with a fine toothed comb yet... maybe over Christmas break I'll find time...

@karlchick
I left it as a hidden option as the mapping was not reliable enough to make it worthwhile.

I tried your change from both to left and it works the same as my theme now.

I'm wondering what aspects of the mapping you found unreliable?

Is it that left/right tagged lanes are relative to the direction the way is drawn in OSM, hence it's dependent on the mapper ensuring the arrow on the way's center is correct? Or something else?

If the direction, I think it makes sense to make this visible in the map rendering so someone can update the OSM definition...

I also agree having not having radio buttons on the stylemenu is a major deficiency in the interface.

I'll try a Locus map weblink for position:

https://web.locusmap.app/loc/51.86898:-2.22724:Cycle%20lanes%20on%20one%20way

Here's the osm link to the way too:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4225982



I wasn't aware of the tag transform documentation, will find and read, thanks.

[Dedicated cycle lanes]

Not many themes support cycle lanes, my os maps theme and John's Voluntary themes do.

But I've noticed some differences between OAM/LoMap maps and also mine/John's theme when it comes to rendering cycle lanes on one ways highways.

Here is what OSM define for cycle ways:

Dedicated cycle lanes
cycleway=lane is used to tag two-way streets where there are cycle lanes on both sides of the road, or one-way streets where there is a lane operating in the direction of main traffic flow.

In my theme I have options to let the user indicate if they are in a country that drives on the left or right, since the logic of which side a cycle lane should exist on a one-way highway depends on in this.

Wondering @john if you decided not to differentiate for one way highways?

Also wondering if OAM tag transforms cycle lanes differently to LoMap, as there are differences in the results using the same rules...

I guess I'll, have to go through the theme rules with a fine toothed comb to figure out what's going on...

@

@karlchick
... which buildings are important?
landuse=retail - does it have any effect for zl=10?  I mean - these areas are often quite small and the user cannot recognize them in zl=10

In my theme, important buildings are: cathedral, hospital, kindergarten, school, college, university, library, and townhall. 

But I would propose just subtracting one from each building's current zoom-appear values, this would then align with OAM maps.

Yes, you're right about landuse=retail at Z10, but having it visible a bit earlier like z12 or z13 would be sufficient. I just noticed that OAM have it set the same as residential and that's already at z10.

Attached is a comparison of LoMap vs OAM showing how the lack of buildings and retail areas make areas of a town centre start to feel empty in the LoMap map.

Reasonable suggestions. I just recently decided not to include residential streets into ZL12, but am still a bit undecided. Tertiary (and bigger) I agree. I start tertiary also in 11.

I saw your change to not show residential at z12 and liked it, I'm trying it out in my theme too, but did it slightly differently, at z12 I'm drawing the residential roads below the landuse=residential. This way any residential roads that exit a town/village and join another highway or on areas with no landuse set they are still visible/connected. Also I have an option to not fill landuse=residential and the the residential roads are still there. At z13 upwards I still draw them over the filled areas.

OK, it's changed...

Thanks, by the way I edited the post to add a few more suggestions.... you were quicker than I could edit the post ;-)

@karlchick
The highway=service and highway=unclassified will be available from ZL=12. What about the highway=track - is it necessary to show them from zl=12?

Yes please. This would be great, maybe useful of planning hiking routes, cycling/mtb routes and 4x4 green laners? But, I guess not as essential as the unclassified and service...

While we're at it, could we also have:

• tertiary visible from z11?
• place=town visible from z8? (Map goes suddenly blank at z8)
• place=locality from z15?
• buildings one zoom level earlier (i.e. important buildings from Z13, others from Z14)?
• landuse=retail from z10 (same as residential)?

These all also disappear rather prematurely...  actually a lot of the landuse tags disappear rather earlier than necessary.

I wonder if some if these settings carry over from v3 maps? With v4 maps being like one zoom level "closer" compared to v3 and with newer phones having much higher resolution screens i think this is becoming more noticeable now...

I noticed that the new PROW tags (designation) in LoMap are visible at Z12 (yay!), but not available in OAM, and in OAM the minor roads/tracks are visible at Z12 (yay!).

If I use overlays to merge OAM and LoMap I can sorta preview what making the minor roads visible from Z12 in LoMap would look like, attached... a best of both (but a bit slow to scroll)...

Lack of minor roads at Z12 looks even worse when using the screen zoom feature, see attached.

Note that "unclassified" highways are very common highway in the UK and are usually national speed limit roads (60mph), they just don't have road numbers. The very often connect villages together too.

Would it be possible to show highway.unclassified, highway.service and highway.track from level Z12?

Attached shows a comparison at Z12 of LoMap vs OAM, see that LoMap shows large blank areas. I think it better to show that there is something in the empty spaces... also, if you are navigating by car,  it would be good to see that there are some minor roads available and where they go,  especially when stuck in traffic jam and contemplating making a diversion...

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 footpath...

If you'd like to get involved in saving unregistered PROW in the UK, here is the website about the topic which also provides a link to an online map of potentially missing PROW.

https://www.ramblers.org.uk/support-us/dont-lose-your-way

1. Do you think your colour coded menus ought to reflect the colours of Explorer/Landranger? (See my previous post)

2. I don't know how OS marks the boundaries of parks but in general for woods,
Explorer: line if fence etc, nothing if unfenced
Landranger: line if fence etc, dashed if unfenced (but varies)
OS-Style Explorer Landranger

3. Buildings appear to have rounded corners in your style OS-Style 

1. I did think of that and it's possible for 50k and 25k maps, but then what to do with the dynamic map which switches between them? Next I considered using different colour based on PROW waymarkers and cycle signs, so yellow for walkers, blue for cyclists, keep purple for mtb... not sure...

2. OS don't tend to mark park boundaries, but rather they use lines to indicate fences/barriers. This information is not present in the OSM data for woods and highways etc...

OS show dashes along the edge of unfenced roads, I guess this is useful to military personnel that might want to cross roads...

If OSM added fence attributes to woods, highways etc AND OAM/LoMap provided it then perhaps I could use it.... but I have  reused dashed highways to indicate unsealed highways, which would conflict then...

Very often woods and sealed highways are fenced, so this kinda makes sense...

3. Rounded corners will be due to the grow buildings option in 50k map. I added this to help merge buildings together in cities as 50k map doesn't show individual buildings in towns etc... if you untick it, it will revert to square buildings (I hope!)