LoMaps + MapsForge V4

[voldapet]

@karlchick
Point 8
OK - surface tags added based on OAM definition. But changed zoom-level to ZL=9


Point 9
I can understand but:
1. for this reason there is hill-shading feature
2. the question is whether this is a shortage and what about the areas in the lowlands ;-)
However, how are contours displayed on the official OS map? Do you know if any OS map at a scale smaller than 1:100k contains contours?

Point 12
Thank you for the explanation. I checked the generation of the `lm_residential` fields and I must say that it is not ideal for your use-case. We use `lm_residential` mainly as a light background to highlight urban areas in small zooms. 
We don't mind if the geometry is simplified - rather that is the goal. `lm_residential` areas really contain the original `landuse=residential` areas but are affected by simplification. One more note - some areas are missing because the lm_residentail areas were quite outdated. 

So I added the `landuse=residential` into tag-mapping file because it isn't really ideal.

I also a little bit improved the generation of `lm_residential` areas - see the screenshot from testing LoMap

@john_percy
Could I kindly ask you for an example of the route without name?

[karlchick]

@voldapet

Point 9
The 1:250,000 OS maps do indeed include contours,  see attached screenshot from memory map and here is a link to the OS 250k legend

OS 250k Legend

You cannot view this attachment.

Interestingly 1:100k maps in the UK have pretty much fallen out of favour, they used to popular in the 50s to 70s as 1/2" scale maps. They used to also include contours, and were very useful for cycle touring. There is an interesting article about these maps:

The great lost map scale

[john_percy]

@voldapet
Brancaster Staithe Circular https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11630291

Grand Union Canal Walk
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/349327



Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

[karlchick]

POSTSCRIPT: It seems to be connected with routes which have neither osmc nor sac_scale. Changing line 1246 to test for sac_scale=hiking|~ makes some routes show.

I have also noticed this, the best I could render is attached (LoMap v3, LoMap v4, OAM). Seems some routes have ref tags and some do not, even when provided in OSM, e.g. NCN routes 1 in this example.

Note that OAM is only showing a single ref tag and seems to pick the ICN EV12 instead over the NCN 1, so highest order/class of route... I really hope LoMap will show a concatenation of all route refs when on the same way, e.g. EV12/1 in this case...

[john_percy]

A beta version of the Voluntary and Velocity themes to work with both this Locus beta app & maps and OAM maps is now available at:
https://voluntary.nichesite.org/beta.html


The new versions are named Voluntary V5 LE and Velocity V5 LE (Locus Edition)

[karlchick]

Hmm.. I think the LoMap approach to cycle/mtb routes is very different compared to OAM.

OAM seems to remap the cycle/mtb/hiking network values through to the highways they are related and uses separated tags for each type of route (network=cycle, mtnetwork=mtb and hknetwork=hiking).

OAM additionally resolves issues like route=mtb and network=ncn, by remapping these through to mtbnetwork=nmn. An example of this can be seen in the attached first pair of images showing LoMap/OAM with the latest v5 Voluntary theme, see how the mtb route is displayed in LoMap with blue/purple blobs but in OAM is only purple blobs.

I resolved this for now in LoMap maps by ignoring the network tag and using just the route=mtb/bicycle values to differentiate them. Separate rules are used for OAM and ignored by LoMap by checking for route="~", since OAM doesn't used route tags for network routes. See second pair of images comparing LoMap/OAM with my latest OS prototype theme.

LoMap having separated routes results in multiple renders for each route, advantage is ref labels for both routes, disadvantage is multiple highlight/emphasis drawn.
 
Another feature/issue... since LoMap is using separated route ways from the highways, I can't determine if a route is off-road. With OAM I am introducing hollow blobs when a route is off-road, see attached third pair of images.

Finally, I am missing OAM's feature to autogenerate route refs when a route has no ref tag, it does this by raking the first letter if each word in the routes name and any numbers, see examples attached and how OAM names the mtb route PWCR.

[john_percy]

I confirm @karlchick's general analysis.

An example of this can be seen in the attached first pair of images showing LoMap/OAM with the latest v5 Voluntary theme, see how the mtb route is displayed in LoMap with blue/purple blobs but in OAM is only purple blobs.

OAM can display hiking, cycle and MTB networks at the same time  what it can't do is display more than one of each type of route at the same time. It always selects the "higher" route. International routes are preferred over national ones and so on.

The blue blobs on the MTB route in Voluntary in the Lomaps version are incorrect. There are not both MTB and bike routes along that road.  In the original map data, MTB networks may have values of icn, ncn, rcn, lcn like cycling networks. OAM changes those to imn, nmn, rmn, lmn to avoid confusion. I was testing on the network value which was ok for OAM but ambiguous for Lomaps. I have adjusted the test and the MTB route displays correctly in the latest beta version Voluntary V5 LE from https://voluntary.nichesite.org/beta.html

The latest Voluntary V5 LE  beta also shows highlighting on Lomaps as seen in the screenshot below.

[voldapet]

@karlchick  @john_percy
Thank you for report about missing hiking routes. It has been fixed and a workaround is available for routes without a defined `osmc:symbol` tag.

@karlchick

Point 9
I see. From the next version will be medium/major contour lines will be available from:

Code Select Expand

<osm-tag key="contour_ext" value="elevation_medium" zoom-appear="9" force-polygon-line="true" />
<osm-tag key="contour_ext" value="elevation_major" zoom-appear="9" force-polygon-line="true" />

Point 13 (multiple routes)
Every cycle/mtb/hiking relation is extracted into separated ways. There is no remapping. The `route` or `network` tags are inherited from source relation. You're right the ways may be multiple rendered but that's our goal for LoMap themes (especially for hiking routes with osmc:symbol).
Please see the following example: The way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/31661172 is member of these two relations https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/75894 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9476067
The generator of marked trails for LoMaps creates two new ways (one for each relation). The tags for the new ways (see below) contain the tags from original way (osmc_highway and highway) and rest of tags is taken (derived) from parent relations. I also mention that the tag 'name' is extended and contains also the `ref` tag (if not already part of the name).

Code Select Expand

 
<way id="16000000000060" user="AsammSW" version="1" >
  <tag k="type" v="route"/>
  <tag k="route" v="bicycle"/>
  <tag k="network" v="ncn"/>
  <tag k="ref" v="1"/>
  <tag k="name" v="NCN National Route 1"/>
  <tag k="osmc_highway" v="tertiary"/>
  <tag k="highway" v="tertiary"/>
  <tag k="osmc" v="yes"/>
  </way>
  <way id="16000000000061" user="AsammSW" version="1" >
  <tag k="type" v="route"/>
  <tag k="route" v="bicycle"/>
  <tag k="network" v="icn"/>
  <tag k="ref" v="EV12"/>
  <tag k="name" v="EuroVelo 12 - North Sea Cycle Route - part United Kingdom 2, EV12"/>
  <tag k="osmc_highway" v="tertiary"/>
  <tag k="highway" v="tertiary"/>
  <tag k="osmc" v="yes"/>
  <tag k="osmc_color" v=""/>
  <tag k="osmc_background" v="blue"/>
  <tag k="osmc_foreground" v=""/>
  <tag k="osmc_text" v="EV12"/>
  <tag k="osmc_text_length" v="4"/>
  <tag k="osmc_text_color" v="white"/>
  </way>


LoMap having separated routes results in multiple renders for each route, advantage is ref labels for both routes, disadvantage is multiple highlight/emphasis drawn.

If this is a major complication perhaps it would be possible to indicate that the way is an xth copy of original way and that multiple routes are concurrent.

Another feature/issue... since LoMap is using separated route ways from the highway

There is already a custom `osmc_highway` tag that divides the original highway into 3 types (we use it to set the correct offset from the parent way). Anyway, I can agree that the original `highway` tag may be useful and the next version of LoMap will contain the `highway` tag inherited from the original OSM way (as shown on the example above).

[voldapet]

@john_percy

Brancaster Staithe Circular https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11630291

Grand Union Canal Walk
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/349327

I'm sorry but both routes contain the names

[john_percy]

@voldapet
1. Thanks for your response about foot routes. Found the mistake in my theme!
2. If you add a highway tag to all routes (as in your example code) won't that cause them all to render as highways unless one adds a "route=~" test to all genuine highways? Would it better to transfer the underlying highway to a rt_highway tag or similar?


Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

[voldapet]

@john_percy

. If you add a highway tag to all routes (as in your example code) won't that cause them all to render as highway

What a big mistake You're absolutely right. I changed it to `lm_highway` (to use same prefix as lm_residential)

Code Select Expand

   <tag k="lm_highway" v="footway"/>

[john_percy]

@voldapet

@karlchick
BTW: are there any standard symbols or styles that indicate designation in the UK maps?

See attached Ordnance Survey legends. PROW are red or green according to the map scale; there are different markings for different types of access rights.



Sent from my moto g(6) plus using Tapatalk

[karlchick]

@voldapet

@karlchick
BTW: are there any standard symbols or styles that indicate designation in the UK maps?

See attached Ordnance Survey legends. PROW are red or green according to the map scale; there are different markings for different types of access rights.

@voldapet
Sorry, I missed that question. Yes OS maps do have symbology for different access rights, colours, dashes and dots are used to represent different Public Rights Of Way (PROW) as in 3rd and 4th attachments.

The designation tags in OSM should allow me to represent all these in the theme, I think.

Note that newer OS maps now also include orange dashed pathways for Permissibe PROW. I have tried to emulate this in OAM using combinations of available tags and it largely works, see first attached (left OS, right OAM). Currently path, PROW path, PROW bridleway, PROW permissive path. It should be a lot easier with the designation tag, but sometimes the access is set to permissive in other situations, hence OAM's foot=ft ft_permissive is useful...

I have also added tidal paths (blue) as a non-OS option, see second attached. Note I use thinner dashed paths for non-PROW paths (as do OS maps). This example shows a low tide alternative path that people sometimes use when walking the South West Coastal Path (SWCP). It has tidal paths/steps and a permissive set of stairs to return  to the hiking SWCP route.

With the designation tag I should be able to represent all the OS symbols... I'm looking forward to an updated LoMap to play with.

Edit:updated images for latest fixes.

[karlchick]

@voldapet

Point 14
Request: would it be possible add natural=bay to LoMaps?

Attached is an example from OSM and comparison of OAM vs LoMap.

Point 15
This is probably something I should request against the app rather than here, but I'm wondering if it would be possible to have a grid like OS maps have, perhaps 1km lines and 10km lines that can be customised by the theme to appear at suitable zoom levels and stroke styles etc..

[voldapet]

Thank you for explaining the OS symbolism and access. I need to consider whether to use it for LoMaps

Point 14
No problem

Point 15
I'm sorry, but I really don't think this should be rendered by themes...