Render tourism=museum areas

[Tomasz-W]

I found that some people are mapping open-air museums as theme parks. It's propably because tourism=theme_park areas are rendered with brown outline, which gives information about object size, but tourism=museum areas are not. Similar tourism=zoo areas also have the same brown outline. Examples:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/248994901
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/480832184

There is around 3k open-air museums (propably that's it, because 25k of museums areas, excluding 22k of cobinations with building=*, gives 3k)
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/tourism=museum#combinations

I think museum areas (excluding combinations with building=* key) should also have this brown outline, which will give map users an information about size of the museum.

[wmyrda]

I agree that original idea to have only the icon was made probably made due to most museums being located in the building hence it seemed satisfactory as the buildings are visible and building=yes together with tourism=museum gave resemblance that all information is available to the user. There are however number of folk museums that are composed of several building and it those cases users tend to map those museums as theme_parks which they are not only to see their areas visible on the map like here http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41714371
I also agree that using brown outline just like with zoo or theme_park would be appropriate way to render those areas hence they are IMHO just as attractive to the tourists. Last, but not least due to them being quite scarce on any given area it would not make to any overcrowding problem on the default map.

[polarbearing]

Consequently a museum campus should get the name scaling with way_area, see #1624

[kocio-pl]

Name scaling would be a problem, since I guess we would still like to have an icon. This is general problem which caused dropping #2361.

[kocio-pl]

What do you suggest then regarding label scaling and the icon (which has fixed size)?

[polarbearing]

As a general problem this would need a general solution, that leads out of the cul-de-sac.

What about treating the icon like a symbol-character, that runs in-line with the text. Thus it has a minimum size if not scaled (small objects, objects without name), and scales along with the text, so it would not appear too monumental above it.
Unicode/github mock-up, just to illustrate the idea:

⚓︎ Small harbour

⚓ Medium harbour

⚓ Big harbour

[kocio-pl]

Hm, we should have icons scaling code then. SVG icons are ready to be scaled up, but is it possible with CartoCSS+Mapnik?

[pnorman]

Hm, we should have icons scaling code then. SVG icons are ready to be scaled up, but is it possible with CartoCSS+Mapnik?

You can't just scale up icons since they will no longer be pixel aligned. Doubling icon size is okay, and in some cases scaling by some fractional ratios is okay, but it requires a lot more thought.

Even if that weren't the case, icon design changes with size. For example, from Maik,

A larger icon means fewer details need to be dropped.

[polarbearing]

Would we need multiple sets of icons then, like a small, middle, large, with predefined pixel sizes?

[kocio-pl]

I would still like to test icon scaling - if it's possible- because it would be technically interesting.

However the ultimate goal is rather to decide which way we want to go. Each proposed solution has some drawbacks, but it doesn't mean we can't use one of them.

[Tomasz-W]

Reference to #2290 (comment)

[polarbearing]

Experiments, following #2290, with museum outline in z18. Combined with track ungraded, track grade1 and residential and commercial background:

[kocio-pl]

Great, the outline is much darker than track (even if not, it would be strange to have track around, but that was an issue before, with the social areas IIRC). For me the only thing left for museums would be barrier visibility.

As of the background - I would not add it, since we have not redefined "commercial" yet.

[Tomasz-W]

What about give the museums the same outline which theme parks already have?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/525117727

They are similar element to each other.

[kocio-pl]

Theme parks and zoos are somewhat similar, I guess museums, cinemas, theaters and so on are a bit different in general.

[dieterdreist]

2018-01-24 15:38 GMT+01:00 Tomasz-W <notifications@github.com>:

What about give the museums the same outline which theme park already have? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/525117727 They are very similar element to each other.

I would change themepark. Brown is not "intuitive", I'd rather use (shop-) purple for theme park outlines

[kocio-pl]

Why do you think this color would be better?

[polarbearing]

I did not mean to propose to add any background. Showing different backgrounds was just to test perception in various cases. When we only render the outline, different backgrounds might appear.

As for "give the museums the same outline as theme parks", it is the same amenity-brown, just as a thinner solid line for the museum, in analogy what @kocio-pl proposed in the accommodation tests.

As for @dieterdreist's proposal to use shop-purple, are you seeing the commercial aspect of theme parks?

[Slawek234]

I would suggest to change the theme_park colour for a more vivid example: yellow, red, purple or another bright color.
yellow https://s17.postimg.org/5jey1num7/z_te.jpg
yellow2 https://s17.postimg.org/uf8dpbhbz/pomara.png
red https://s17.postimg.org/5lytop0wf/red2.jpg
pink https://s17.postimg.org/x9bj2qwcv/r_owy.png
purple https://s17.postimg.org/55dm2exrj/fiolo.jpg
grenade https://s17.postimg.org/p3th4g2xb/granat.png
blue https://s17.postimg.org/pgkvapsxr/bluee.png

[polarbearing]

Thanks a lot, I'd suggest we investigate new colours for theme_park in a separate issue.

[polarbearing]

Barrier is harder here, very subtle. First some z19. Note the fence is only mapped on the vertical boundary.
Barrier off / Barrier on with brown offset -1 / Barrier on with brown offset -1.5

Here the fence is mapped on the boundary left of the apron, and diverges right of it:

[kocio-pl]

What if you keep inside line instead of the outside one (in the original double-line border one is more shifted inside than the other - you have probably kept the outside one)?

[polarbearing]

Not sure what you mean. The line-offset controls shifting the boundary inwards or outwards, here is an extreme with -5 which that creates a gap between the brown line and the grey fence.

Typically the offset is half the line width to keep the boundary within the feature. When I shift it further inwards, the landuse colour spills outside the brown line, in particular when no fence is mapped.

[Tomasz-W]

If we are going to discuss about change leisure=theme_park outline colour, maybe we move amenity-brown outline to museum areas, and change theme parks outline to yellow? It will distinguish them enough.

[polarbearing]

We might discuss changing theme_park, but we certainly will keep brown for the museum, which is distinguishable by its icon anyway. Currently I am fighting with fence visibility.

Here is a test with a lighter version of brown (no transparency to prevent colour merging). Fence visibility improves (left of apron with, right without because fence moves away).

And in conjunction with the icon, z16+z18:

[kocio-pl]

After fast change of societal amenities color, we could use "intermediate" one as a color for all cultural and entertainment areas (for example museums and drive-in cinemas), since it's too intense for bigger areas, but for relatively not popular areas it works good for me.

The same place with current societal amenities color visible around (#ffffe5 - merged to the master, not released yet) with intermediate societal amenities color (#fbecd7) used for museum - z16 and z18:

Another example (near landuse=commercialarea):

[polarbearing]

Would that proposed colour fit some other amenities as well?

The last render example shows very little of the area colour thanks to lots of green. An outline would show the exact campus.

[kocio-pl]

Well, I guess most of the museum areas are fenced, so I believe the outline is not necessary to get the shape.

[Tomasz-W]

Well, I guess most of the museum areas are fenced, so I believe the outline is not necessary to get the shape.

When you sit and look closely on a map (if there is a clear fence), you propably will see the shape, but in many cases it's more complicated or it's lost in well-mapped-area jungle. Our goal is to make an intuitive map without need for looking closely in search of something, so I believe that cultural-like campuses should have a clear outlines.

[polarbearing]

Fully agree with @Tomasz-W that relying on fences is misleading. You could even have fences within the museum area, then such approach gets lost (yes i have an example in mind).

[jeisenbe]

It would only be feasible to render an area fill for museums, #3954 (theatres) and similar features if they call can have the same color fill.

We could do this be simplyfing the rendering to use the same color for all public urban areas, for example e.g. render commercial the same as retail and use the current commercial color for other amenities, or the same color for retail, commercial, and public facilities like museums. But I suspect that there will be some opposition to removing the distinction.

Or we could render all public places like museums and theatres the same as stadiums, sports centers, schools, universities, and hospitals. But I’m not sure if there would be support for that either?

[BertMule]

Fences are often not even drawn, and even when, hardly visible.

I favour a filling. Secondly a boundary (but not as harsh as a theme-park currently ).

My example in 4805 is a train-museum, combining a rail-yard with buildings.

[BertMule]

Will anyone pick this up?
I just noticed this as been out since 2017!

[BertMule]

Such a shame, nothing happens in more than 6 years.

Yet another example.
You have to know the Folkemuseum is there to see it, sort of.
It's hard to find. It's hard to see the dimensions.

That's how I was reminded of this issue.