[Theme] OS Map (v20210216 for v3 and v4 maps); New: Road Surfaces

[karlchick]

Hi Karl, I notice your theme doesn't distinguish between sealed & unsealed roads. Unfortunately very few Locus themes do, which seems odd as you'd think cyclists would be quite interested in the road surface. Bernard's Desert theme (www.maiwolf.de) is the best for this - his on LHS compared to yours on RHS. Voluntary is the only other one that shows any difference but it is very hard to discern.

for example in my screen cap: https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=16/-42.5113/147.6427
compares surface=unpaved with surface=Asphalt

Hi Andrew,

Attached is a sneaky peek at the road surfaces/grades overlay option I have prototyped for the OS Map theme.
   - 1st image is the default OS map view
   - 2nd image is road surfaces/grades enabled
   - 3rd image is with the emphasise road surfaces/grades enables too

With the road surfaces/grades option selected, if the road is unsealed it will have a dashed casing and the core will have a texture applied based on the type of surface.

The second attachement shows the current road surface/grades renderings and highlight colours.

It is still very much work in progress. I have to say that I have not yet found a real life example of surface="winter"...

[karlchick]

FYI: Here is an example of unsealed trunk and classified roads in Botswana (both are listed as compacted surface), see attached, rendered with the new road surfaces/grades option I'm working on.

I checked on google maps and OSM data base.... all these roads in the map view are actually compacted earth, including the unclassified road shown as sealed. But this is because the map data does not define any surface/grade for it... so the rendered view (as always) is only as good as the data in the map...

[john_percy]

Have you tried Lake Baikal for surface=winter? There's a well known ice road across it, and I have read that the area is well mapped on OSM.

Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

[Andrew Heard]

Attached is a sneaky peek at the road surfaces/grades overlay option I have prototyped for the OS Map theme.

a sneaky peak ;-) NICE. Looks great on my PC screen. Looking forward to checking on smaller device screen.

[karlchick]

New release now available v20210216.

i have updated the first post with the latest release notes and links. I'm now using google drive to release the theme in a shared folder that contains all the releases and the PDF legends.

In this update I have added support for depicting road surfaces and distinguishing between sealed and unsealed roads/tracks. This is applicable to all highway types (including pedestrian and cycle paths) except for motorways.

The attached is a graphical summary (as presented in the map legend) of the new overlay options:

• "dash unsealed roads" to give unsealed roads a dashed outline/casing.
• "road surface/grade textures" to give unsealed roads a textured pattern that represents the type of surface, visible from Z14 onwards.
• "emphasise road surface/grade textures" to highlight roads surfaces at lower zoom levels, visible from Z12.

The second attachment identifies which "surface" and "tracktype" tag values are mapped to the new surfaces.

not all maps support the "surface" tag, but do support the "tracktype" tag. For this reason, the "tracktype" tag is also used to set the road surfaces, albiet at a lesser level of detail (normal, compacted, gravel, dirt). Note that tracks tagged as trackype=grade1, which are also tagged with surface=asphalt, are now "promoted" to sealed roads (solid casing).

I am conscious that I have highjacked a feature of standard OS maps on which they use dashed road casings to represent unfenced roads (in fact a road can be solid one side and dashed the other to show fenced/walled/constrained on just one wide). However, since OAM/LM maps do not (currently) support a tag for fenced roads it seemed a good idea to use the same symbology for sealed/unsealed roads...

These new options are not enabled by default, as the default overlay options are for classic/standard OS map look/feel, and of course OS maps do not have such features.

[Andrew Heard]

Attached is my "test POI" where there is a sealed/ unsealed transition. The new theme is looking great. Well done. It does look better on a bigger PC screen (and with glasses) compared to a phone screen, but still nice! I intentionally reduced the image resolution a little to simulate a bit of device blurriness.

[Igor Martić]

Hello, this theme is great for planning gravel rides, as it emphasizes gravel and dirt roads but it seems only works with openmaps.eu v3 maps. However these maps are last updated in june and with openandromaps v4 and v5 it emphasizes only some of the dirt roads. Anyone uses it? Screenshots of the same area, two mentioned maps, to better illustrate the problem. Thanks.

Poslano sa mog POT-LX1 koristeći Tapatalk

[karlchick]

Hmm... I've tested the theme on both lomaps and openandromaps v3 and v4, they all work as expected. Admittedly these are all uk maps. My main thought is that perhaps what is being displayed is what is defined in the map data?

You can configure a quick bookmark to open openstreetmap at the same location and check what is defined for the track in question.  E.g. does it have surface=gravel or tracktype=grade3?

[Igor Martić]

Hello Karl,

this is map of Croatia in question, but it is weird that only openmaps.eu have all this gravel data in their mapsforge map, everyone else only have some mayor gravel roads. I'm not an expert with osm but don't they all pull the same osm data? Anyway, if you have time and will can I trouble you to check for yourself on map of Croatia, from openmaps.eu, lomaps and openandromaps(balkan area)?

Thanks.

Poslano sa mog POT-LX1 koristeći Tapatalk

[john_percy]

On examining the OSM data, the "extra" gravel tracks that appear in version 3 maps have been simply coded as highway=track. The gravel tracks that appear in both versions were coded highway=track AND surface=compacted.
IMHO, if a way is coded simply as highway=track, it's wrong to make any assumption about the surface.
Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

[karlchick]

Hmm... I'm using the following rule to display a track as gravel:

<rule e="way" k="highway" v="track">
    <rule e="way" k="tracktype|surface" v="grade3|gravel">

I'm not sure now why a picked grade3 for gravel, whe osm states grade2... but it was tailored for v4 OAM... see earlier post with key for the mapping...

Perhaps I should not interpret the tracktypes like this? I think the grades a more a scale of track condition...perhaps I should include grades in the map legend too, e.g gravel or grade3... (Update, just noticed I never added the surfaces to the legend!)


Regarding the .eu maps, I think they use a different tag mapping from OAM, hence they provide their own rendering theme, this is obvious when you compare:
  - v4 Oam, os map v4
  - v3 Oam, os map v3
  - v3 eu, os map v3
  - v3 Oam, openmaps v7 
  - v3 eu, openmaps v7
Attached are matching screenshot.

You can see how the openmap v7 theme really struggles to render the v3 oam.... clearly the tag mapping is significantly different, this is fixed at time of creation of the map.

I would recommend either sticking with using the eu map with the openmap v7 theme, or switching to v4 oam maps if you wish to use one of the many oam themes.

[john_percy]

@karlchick I think it may be better to test for tracktype first, then if grade is not specified (tracktype=~) test for surface.
<rule e="way" k="highway" v="track">
    <rule e="way" k="tracktype" v="grade3">
...
    </rule>
    <rule e="way" k="tracktype" v="~">
        <rule e="way" k="surface" v="gravel">
...
        </rule>
    </rule>
 </rule>

Also, I seem to recall that for OAM maps surfaces are combined in such a way that your rough equivalence of grade=3 and surface=gravel is OK.

[Igor Martić]

Thanks guys for your time to test and for explanations.

Poslano sa mog POT-LX1 koristeći Tapatalk