Skip to content
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

Hide railway=platform with location=underground, tunnels and covered=yes #3162

Merged
merged 1 commit into from May 3, 2018

Conversation

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@kocio-pl
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Apr 2, 2018

Related to #2504, #2037 and #1659.

Changes proposed in this pull request:

  • Hide railway platforms which are located underground, because they eclipse station buildings too much and this is rather indoor feature (see https://www.openstationmap.org )

Test rendering with links to the example places:

Warsaw
Before
zw4rvxvq
After
qw3ocor3

Berlin
Before
xecy6jgv
After
qjfugaih

@kocio-pl kocio-pl force-pushed the kocio-pl:underground-platforms branch from 3cdddac to 7b6b421 Apr 2, 2018

@daganzdaanda

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Apr 2, 2018

This PR seems to hide more than just the "location=underground" platforms. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/918697 for a level 2 platform that is not visible anymore.

But generally I like the idea. It's a hard decision to make - more mapper feedback vs. a more usable map. IMHO we can't continue to show everything anymore. We should hide nearly everything that is not on the ground level (using the "level" tag). Maybe there will be some way in the future to turn on some indoor / level-by-level / 3D features on the main map.

@kocio-pl

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 2, 2018

Thanks for spotting it! Do you have an idea why is that? Hm, maybe we just need to include platforms without location tag (NULL checking). The fix should be quite simple then.

I don't know if there are underground platforms, but if yes, that should help also:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/138141251#map=18/40.75063/-73.99338

I hope to hide more underground features, but have no idea how to code it (see #1977).

@kocio-pl

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 3, 2018

Looks like it really was the missing null checking, updated renderings:

Warsaw Central Station
Before
wiqx9l4e

After
6ucp_1f2

Warsaw Śródmieście Station
Before
wsrgzt g

After
6mrnnbqi

Madison Square Garden (USA, NY)
Before
tqtbh_dv

After
orgixep3

Berlin Hauptbahnhof
Before
9xrtq2mo

After
v7w1in8

@kocio-pl kocio-pl force-pushed the kocio-pl:underground-platforms branch from 75843f4 to 380a8bc Apr 3, 2018

@kocio-pl kocio-pl referenced this pull request Apr 6, 2018

Open

Consider level=* #1977

@kocio-pl

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Apr 15, 2018

I'm still not sure about levels, but I was told that tunnel=yes is also worth hiding and I have found that there are ~1700 such railway platforms.

@kocio-pl kocio-pl force-pushed the kocio-pl:underground-platforms branch 2 times, most recently from 197dba6 to 9b238d1 May 2, 2018

@kocio-pl

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 2, 2018

It looks like platforms in tunnels should be hidden too (the code has to avoid catching them also by other layers) to avoid mess like these:

London, platform under ground and on the ground:

Before
knk1c3rs

After
nfbyaauu

London, many underground platforms:

Before
tfkwunht

After
y8qnmmbf

@kocio-pl

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 2, 2018

The same for covered=yes - basically anything that is not in clear view creates a mess:

London, covered station platforms

Before
dzwut9gf

After
orvsack

@kocio-pl kocio-pl changed the title Hide railway=platform with location=underground Hide railway=platform with location=underground, tunnels and covered=yes May 2, 2018

@kocio-pl kocio-pl force-pushed the kocio-pl:underground-platforms branch from 12a4c85 to 134312b May 3, 2018

@kocio-pl kocio-pl merged commit 096d82b into gravitystorm:master May 3, 2018

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

@kocio-pl kocio-pl deleted the kocio-pl:underground-platforms branch May 3, 2018

@mueschel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 11, 2018

This hides all platforms with the tag 'covered = yes' completely. In several cases I checked, this results in a platform completely vanishing without any object drawn instead. Examples:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/49212472

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/196930811

This complete hiding of platforms is definitely worse than having a platform covering a small piece of roof.

@kocio-pl

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jun 11, 2018

I don't think it's definitely worse. If it's covered fully, one should add the covering object. If it's partially, one need to set covered=partially.

I still see no better way to avoid clutter while at the same time promoting more precise tagging for covered=*.

@mueschel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 12, 2018

I think that platforms (even underground ones) are a very important feature. In fact, much more important than the roof covering it. If I'm not familiar with a station, I have to identify the platforms, but I don't need to know where roofs are.

In many cities it's important to know where subway platforms are - just having the station node and (if lucky) some subway_entrance is not sufficient to find the best ways (and this style is "the way" to look at OSM data for most users). I fear that this decision leads to platform areas marked as highway=pedestrian just to make them visible on the map again.

I know it's a short coming of the renderer to not be able to arbitrarily set the order of rendering or transparency in every individual case, but platforms are just too important to remove them.

@kocio-pl

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jun 12, 2018

In many cities it's important to know where subway platforms are - just having the station node and (if lucky) some subway_entrance is not sufficient to find the best ways (and this style is "the way" to look at OSM data for most users)

I think this is exactly what is needed - to know where the station is and where are the entrances (this is the closest thing for subway routing - once you pass them, you have the easy way to the platform). That's why I've also made stations to be dark brown to be easier to spot as buildings.

The platforms are part of internal station plan, so if they are visible, then we can show them of course, but if not, they are secondary feature which creates a lot of clutter and shape distortion (shops can make a clutter too, but they don't eclipse station shape and they are much more general feature, and we can't detect when they are part of the station).

I fear that this decision leads to platform areas marked as highway=pedestrian just to make them visible on the map again.

This is always valid consideration, but I feel that the universal style is not a QA tool, rather general overview.

I've made this change as a last minute addition, but the more I think about it, the more I appreciate it.

@dieterdreist

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 13, 2018

@lakedistrictOSM

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jun 17, 2018

@kocio-pl Was this supposed to hide both areas and lines or just areas? I ask because https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48837616 isn't hidden, yet has a location=underground tag.

@kocio-pl

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Jun 17, 2018

I would be happy to hide also such lines.

@famo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 4, 2019

I would be happy to hide also such lines.

@kocio-pl Is there already an specific issue for this, where we could track this?

@kocio-pl

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 4, 2019

Yes, look at #3336.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.