If/when you move to a translation platform (or a way of translating easier than the current one), I’ll help you with French (if no one is quicker than me). I’m a great fan of OpenCampingMap.

Thank you for the long post. I have thought many of the things you have written here while answering the survey. At least 2 questions I have found far too misleading to answer spontaneously and agreeing with my own answers. Too bad the OSMF did not ask for an outside view on what they produced internally.

Hello,

If you need more info on Maperitive, the user-group is somewhat, sometimes more able to answer you: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/maperitive

(If my Deutsch is not too bad and I understood well) The main difference between slippy and paper maps is the amount of work needed to make them. You’ll need a good style sheet for both, but if you want something clean for the paper version, you have to do some additional manual work on each one you produce. And after some tests I made, this amount of work is huge. As you cannot just zoom in to get more info, you have to cram what you really want to show in the available space.

Christophe, merci d’avoir eu la patience et la hargne de maintenir le débat. Effectivement, pour moi « petit » contributeur qui n’aime pas débattre en anglais, ta résistance est particulièrement bienvenue. Vu d’ici, l’OSMF semble avoir pris une bien triste direction sur le sujet, orientée entreprises et non communauté.
Danke sehr, Christoph, für deine lange antworten.

Cache problem. I did not guess you just added the fonction. By the way, how often is the data updated?

@PlaneMad: Can’t get it work. Trying to click on the elements, but just nothing happens. Firefox here.

Hello,

Didn’t know about http://osmlab.github.io/fixing-polygons-in-osm/map/. But could you provide an «Edit in JOSM» button? If the aim is that someone clean the mess, I think such a shortcut would be more than welcome.

JB

Salut,

c’est moi l’auteur du guide sur la chaine des puys (à faire avec un seau pour puiser l’eau)… Ta traduction a l’air pas mal, mais juste pour clarifier, le guide de rando n’est pas basé sur opentopomap, mais sur R25 qui utilise Maperitive pour le rendu. Pas pour en faire la promo, mais je crois que R25 rend plus d’éléments qu’OpenTopo.

Opentopomap est une épreuve de force, car il a l’air d’être écrit directement en xml pour mapnik…

À plus,

JB.

@karussell: not sure that crossing a ford over a ditch/stream for a hiker really is a safety issue. In mountain hiking, most stream crossings don’t have a bridge or a culvert!

Hello, Unfortunately, still unable to route pedestrians (foot and hike) through fords… So still not used for hiking! JB.

Seems that the foot router does not route over fords (ford=yes). I think it is a pity, especially over ditches and streams (waterway=ditch/stream), as is written in the wiki « you should be able to jump over a stream ». It becomes less usefull for hikers.

Answering only on the footway rendering (partly because I think the other proposals are either good or better than the current rendering, or too much of a question of taste).

I guess I really don’t like any of the highway=footway proposals: neither are visible enough and different enough from other rendered elements:

• purple rendering is too close to the border current style, the continuous line being just one version of the dash-styles. Besides, on the example given here on forest, it looks grey even when knowing it is purple. Very thin grey line is used for some kind of barrier, if I remember well?

• pink seems rather a «non-physical element» color. It is also too close to the private highway color. Orange is kind of the same.

• with borders, it looks like a strange service road that didn’t get the white center painted.

Proposals/suggestions now. I don’t want to reopen the path/footway debate once more, but what about the path rendering? Will it be modified or remain the same? I think that the path style cannot really be left out of this proposal.

To me, it seems that it would also be a much better start point for the footways rendering (black thin and long dashes): visible enough (why decrease so much the footway visibility when keeping the cycleways at the same visibility level?), coherent/readable enough (used on several rendering styles).

Path (without a bicycle=yes/designated tag) and footway (without a bicycle=yes/designated tag) could, in my opinion, be rendered asame, with the style switched back to the cycleway when bicycle are explicitly allowed (as is currently the case for footways, I think).

And finally, thanks for the job and being able to take in all the criticism, that, I hope, remains helpful!

Nice work! Good that someone focuses not on importing, but on the maintenance… even if in this case, it should have been done before the import.

Hey, routing is not the only way OSM data is used!

Anyway, good idea to spot some little used tags out here.

Quarter a pas une grande emprise en France, moins de 100 occurences contre plus de 1000 et 3000 pour les autres… Est-ce que la différence entre quarter, suburb et neighborhood est trop subtil pour avoir 3 niveaux plutôt que 2 ?

Rather surprising… I did not expected something like that happening and increasing too that level that fast… Any idea how many subscribers there are to diversity-talk? It seems that only about 20-30 people are writing there, but is the circle that small, or are there many silent readers? I wonder if a small group could react harsher than a large, self-regulating one.

I hope we do not loose you with the event, and wish you can go on « happy mapping ».

And I wonder if the list can really come out of that without simply dissapearing and reappearing in an other form…

And still the same question… Is it better that the newbie does not know he breaks things when saving (and is not afraid of going on), or that he gets some warning message saying, hey, check this, it looks strange. My opinion is clear-cut, but it is thought that iD « must not scare newcomers ».

That’s why I love JOSM, even for the first time they edit! And that I use it in carto-parties.

À ce jour, plus de 1500 bars ont été cartographiés, dans le monde entier, grâce au site Openbeermap, à l’appli et au travail des contributeurs OpenStreetMap.

1500 bars par OBM ? Parce que sur OSM, on trouverait plutôt 7700 bars en France et 69000 dans le monde…

At least, they dared write that: « The White Paper was funded in part by MapBox. » (http://spatiallaw.blogspot.fr/2014/10/the-odbl-and-openstreetmap-analysis-and.html)

But I wouldn’t want to imply that the money-giver pointed to some directions.