-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 576
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add information necessary to implement Trails Working Group rendering guidelines #1618
Comments
Hi, I think that the easiest way could be just to extend the |
IMO that's too little information. You certainly couldn't implement the example rendering tree linked. |
I was going to write something about the tree, but then I noticed the top of the page linked
OpenMapTiles needs to work everywhere. Their recommendations are built around paths with Land Managers, while most paths don't have a Land Manager in the sense they are talking about. I suspect most footpaths are far more similar to a sidewalk than a footpath on public lands, but would welcome an analysis. I think two attributes are the best method of doing this. One for access with three possible values - yes (including plain highway=footway with no other tags), sort of, and no access. The other would be surface, also with three possible values - paved, unpaved, or unknown. The cartographer making a style could then choose if they wanted emphasis on access or surface, depending on their needs. |
I am presently hosting a trails vector layer for OSM US's trail project (the working group and the OpenTrailMap.us map). It's accessible here for anyone that wants to play with it: https://d1zqyi8v6vm8p9.cloudfront.net/trails.json That's outside of OpenMapTiles of course, but it's fairly easy to generate custom layers for this kind of thing in planetiler. The schema I've used to generate that trails layer is here. |
I think that would work 👍
This is already there and played a big part in my being able to build V1 of OpenTrailStash! (The field is just blank when unknown) https://openmaptiles.org/schema/#surface |
Which, thinking about it, could be implemented similarly to the |
It's currently not possible to implement the Trail Working Group's rendering suggestions with OpenMapTiles because it doesn't expose the
informal
oroperator
tags.The easiest way to support this would of course be to just pass these through to tiles directly (probably only for
class=path
).But I could see creating a combined field sort of like
brunnel
, in part because the specific operator probably doesn't matter for renderers, maybe justinformal
and setinformal=no
when anoperator
tag is set or just the value ofinformal
if that's present. And omit the field when there exists noinformal
oroperator
tag on the way.I chatted with @ZeLonewolf about this a little, and he suggested maybe something in
class
orsubclass
but I don't know how OMT feels about breaking changes, given those are already populated for these sorts of ways.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: