Opened 7 years ago

Last modified 7 years ago

#16103 closed enhancement

Add map type definition to XML — at Version 21

Reported by: stoecker Owned by: team
Priority: normal Milestone: 18.05
Component: Core imagery Version:
Keywords: Cc: Klumbumbus

Description (last modified by stoecker)

Should we add map and aerial/satellite image flags too. I think every source can be assigned to one of these three types. Displaying a little icon for the flag in wiki:Help/Preferences/Imagery would be nice and easier to understand what an entry is about.

See 14655#comment:91.

Current Suggestion: add an property "category" with supported values "photo", "map", "historicmap", "osmbasedmap", "historicphoto" and "other".

Change History (21)

comment:1 by stoecker, 7 years ago

Component: CoreCore imagery
Type: defectenhancement

comment:2 by stoecker, 7 years ago

Milestone: 18.03

in reply to:  description comment:3 by Klumbumbus, 7 years ago

Replying to stoecker:

Suggestion: add an property "type" with supported values "photo" and "map".

and maybe "gps" (thinking of the strava heatmaps)
The overlay flag needs to be separate then, as both gps and map can be a overlay or not.

comment:4 by stoecker, 7 years ago

Well, I don't like "gps", as its outdated. In geodesy we use GNSS, but nobody outside the business knows what that is. Better term: "track", "measurement"?

Type is already taken BTW. We need something else as well: "variant", "class"?

in reply to:  4 comment:5 by Klumbumbus, 7 years ago

Replying to stoecker:

Well, I don't like "gps", as its outdated. In geodesy we use GNSS, but nobody outside the business knows what that is. Better term: "track", "measurement"?

This is maybe a bit out of scope of this ticket. We use "gps" all over in JOSM. A Launchpad search for "gps" gives 129 results. I think this must be decided later global for whole JOSM. Maybe the term GNSS becomes more popular one day when galileo is widespread used.

comment:6 by Don-vip, 7 years ago

"Other" would be fine. There won't be a lot.

in reply to:  6 comment:7 by Klumbumbus, 7 years ago

Replying to Don-vip:

"Other" would be fine. There won't be a lot.

sources, which come to my mind for "other":

  • OpenStreetMap GPS Traces
  • Strava cycling heatmap
  • Strava running heatmap
  • Strava cycling and running heatmap
  • Strava water sports heatmap
  • Strava winter sports heatmap
  • LPI NSW Imagery Dates (--> in australia, shows the date when the imagery was taken)

I think these rather count as "map" and "overlay":

  • Locator Overlay
  • QA No Address
  • OSM Inspector: Geometry
  • OSM Inspector: Tagging
  • OSM Inspector: Places
  • OSM Inspector: Highways
  • OSM Inspector: Area
  • OSM Inspector: Routing
  • OSM Inspector: Addresses
  • OSM Inspector: Coastline (EU)
  • OSM Inspector: Public Transport - Stops
  • OSM Inspector: Public Transport - Routes
  • OSM Inspector: Water

comment:8 by Klumbumbus, 7 years ago

We would need a type "multiple" too for wms_endpoint entries, which provide "map" and "photo" (and "other").

And what about a flag "osm_based" for sources based (mainly) on osm data?

  • osm inspector entries
  • QA No Address
  • Opencyclemap
  • openrailwaymap
  • stamen
  • waymarked trails
  • carto
  • Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Myanmar bilingual
  • ...

comment:9 by anonymous, 7 years ago

Also "historic" would be important to be able to filter these maps. But I also don't want more than one value for this.

My suggestion: "kind"
historicmap, osmmap, map, photo, other

comment:10 by stoecker, 7 years ago

Last was me. Regarding mixed: simply don't specify a value?

in reply to:  10 ; comment:11 by Klumbumbus, 7 years ago

Replying to stoecker:

Regarding mixed: simply don't specify a value?

Then you don't know if it is mixed or not yet specified.

comment:12 by Klumbumbus, 7 years ago

Last edited 7 years ago by Klumbumbus (previous) (diff)

comment:13 by stoecker, 7 years ago

Current list: "kind"
historicmap, map, osmbasedmap, historicphoto, photo, other
That's it (for now)?

in reply to:  11 comment:14 by stoecker, 7 years ago

Replying to Klumbumbus:

Replying to stoecker:

Regarding mixed: simply don't specify a value?

Then you don't know if it is mixed or not yet specified.

ATM I think that's acceptable. If really necessary we can add types later.

comment:15 by Klumbumbus, 7 years ago

For photo one could distinguish between true color and false color (infrared in most cases). But that would required an separate attribute again as it is independed from if the photo is historic or not.

What exactly means historic? Everything where a newer variant is available?

comment:16 by Don-vip, 7 years ago

Milestone: 18.0318.04

comment:18 by stoecker, 7 years ago

From the ELI ticket I'd take suggestion "category" for the key.

category: historicmap, map, osmbasedmap, historicphoto, photo, other

in reply to:  15 comment:19 by stoecker, 7 years ago

Sorry, forgot to answer last time.

Replying to Klumbumbus:

For photo one could distinguish between true color and false color (infrared in most cases). But that would required an separate attribute again as it is independed from if the photo is historic or not.

Mostly the Infrared is already in the name. I still think that overdoing the categorization will do more harm than good.

I try to imagine use cases in the editor for filtering

  • historic: use case should be clear
  • osmbasedmap: I.e. I don't want to see derivates
  • map/photo: I only care for imagery.

What use case would color specification or finer details allow as a generic filter?

What exactly means historic? Everything where a newer variant is available?

I'd say so. And anything which is at least 20 years old :-)

Last edited 7 years ago by stoecker (previous) (diff)

comment:20 by stoecker, 7 years ago

Description: modified (diff)

Update description

comment:21 by stoecker, 7 years ago

Description: modified (diff)
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.