Hi, this project is great, thanks for the article which made me aware of it! We lack such a research in OSM, wish you luck.

I made a short description on English wiki:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Micromapping#Stra.C3.9Fenraumkarte_Neuk.C3.B6lln

Feel free to edit it and maybe add some info about it on German wiki too.

See the updated name - Folklore Cultural Theatre. the rest is not name, just description and it’s correctly tagged now (description:ru) - using automated translation:

Katakali Dance Show. $ 25 traditional Katakali dance is mentioned in the 2nd century and develops until the 16th century. Katakali is a kind of dance drama that unfolds in the dance, this dance has been the progenitor of the folk theater since ancient times.

It’s not that easy.

The other day Christoph asked about how one verify location of a (bay) node told that it’s a middle of that bay. Which suggests me that he believes it’s possible to estimate the shape, since otherwise it would be not possible to calculate the middle. So node position is less verifiable for me, since not only you have to know the shape, but also choose some centroid method, which can give different results on non-trivial shapes.

But if you believe the local can say the name, why shouldn’t we believe she knows the area, only the node? (there are different problems to say who could be “local” in remote places, but that’s not the core).

It’s pretty clear that humans generally have a consensus

But which humans? If not locals, then 3rd party sources for verifying are OK - which Christoph does not like to accept.

Please open the ticket for this, so everybody interested could discuss it.

So, if a local will draw a geometry, you will accept it?

That’s exactly why I ask you. How do you verify “Baffin Bay” name, for a start, if not using 3rd party sources you are so much against it?

OK, you criticized my take on 2, but did not answer 1, which is more interesting for me. I do not understand your position on that.

Ouch! I was not expecting this trap, my leg…

2) is pretty easy:

At the core, “verifiability” is that everything you do can be demonstrated to be true or false

This is what just happened - you demonstrated that it is false and needs to be improved. I can compare them and say the same.

1) is more complicated. How do you observe the name of the named area outside the land? If you can’t, does it mean it does not belong to the OSM database at all?

Here’s a proposition how to verify shape of the Baffin Bay for example (item number 14, page 10):

http://www.iho.int/iho_pubs/standard/S-23/S-23_Ed3_1953_EN.pdf

If you look at the OSM websiite documentation, you can learn about Vagrant deployment:

https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/blob/master/VAGRANT.md

There are also some remarks about production type deployment (not just for testing code):

https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/blob/master/CONFIGURE.md#production-deployment

Yes I’m aware of all this, thanks. :-)

I just wanted to start discussing for example if this style of rendering is OK once we get proper tagging, we could be prepared for that. Ideally some code would be good to have and I guess that somebody well motivated (and it seems that Ukrainians are) might like to try with CartoCSS.

Could you open a ticket - and propose a code if possible - in OSM Carto issue tracker?

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues

Oh, I see. :-) Sorry for not being clear - I just wandered where you got this idea from.

No, we just test objects with names to be sure that the name will be visible if it’s included, but in OSM Carto there is separate code for name labels and icon rendering. Why do you think the icons could rely on names?

Examples:

• https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5837095833
• https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5987605218

Great, nice to see some of the icons and colors I’ve designed personally in such remote places. :-)

@EdLoach: I guess Matthijs was just counting from the highest zoom levels up to 0:

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/commit/d07b2bf3932f793d2b8c0605a3094df8403f69d3#diff-2d6c6d06f63a6fab47286addedefc335L440

@Antonino Giaramida: This problem is known, but I don’t know what could be the solution and how it exactly relates to OSM Carto:

https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/1998 https://github.com/mapnik/mapnik/issues/3749

This is a problem of a project that was born in UK… For example in Poland we have something like “milky bar”, but there is no popular tag for that.

I think you could talk about this on Tagging list to create some standard for Eastern amenities, it would be great to have some kind of standard not limited by UK/Western types:

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

My thumb rule is size - if there are wheeled baskets, then it’s supermarket, otherwise (hand basket, no basket) it’s convenience.

For me it’s rather amenity than shop, so I tried amenity=coffee, but I’‘m not sure.

Hi,

I think that most “supermarkets” there are convenience shops, like this one:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5980632259

BTW: how do you tag bubble tea shops?

Thanks for your comment, Joseph!

I used to think about diversity just like that - that it’s Europe/USA vs rest of the world. But now I think about urban/rural differences. Big city in Asia is more similar to big city in Canada than forest areas in Canada. More and more people tend to live in cities around the world.

I also believe HOT style is more suitable for depicting remote areas. It’s also volunteer-based style and they show much less objects, so it should be easier there:

https://github.com/hotosm/HDM-CartoCSS

And I’m talking only about density of objects and initial zoom levels here. I hope to show some objects that are frequently used in developing countries, like water wells for example:

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1224

If there are other similar things, I’m happy to show them too.