Size of words? Can you expand on this because I don’t understand your problem. Also include the editor and region involved.

I would say there should be tiles with just the road shapes and names to be used as a reference for mappers. This was done for United States mappers with the more recent TIGER maps.

I don’t see how this relates to OSM, if you want to add these institutions / POIs into OSM fine but unless you have locals that know where these places are you won’t be able to get much help from armchair mappers. If you want to generate maps using OSM data again this will be specific to your project and or region.

What is the goal? Why and what is the context?

I was skeptical at first but the new colors are growing on me. I would love to bug test, are there any test tile servers?

I was a bit skeptical before and didn’t want the highway(Motorway) colors to change but it does look better. I would love to bug test this style, are there any test servers?

@ Mateusz Konieczny

On the other landuses such as grass parks and forests, they can have textures added like the forest currently has, hatched patters (grass like hatches) This can be done with minimal visual impact.

On the polkadot filling being visually busy, yest it will be but it will be visually distinct and blend in with the current footway rendering and stand out. Part of the point of the theme is to allow mappers to see features, the map is all ready busy because of that. I don’t see that as a problem but a core design feature.

On the “Problem” of blue motorways and rivers, I don’t see that anyone would get confused, the motorway is much darker than any water way, Are there any places or pictures that demonstrate this is indeed a problem?

At the very least I think this is worth some experimentations to see how these suggestions pan out and how they are received by mappers. I understand this is a hard problem and that any change may introduce new bugs / regressions. This is a hard task to take and again appreciate the work put into this so far.

@ jremillard There is a difference between a hiking trail and a paved footway. Paths are hiking trails places where people travel by foot / bike and prevent extra vegetation thus cutting a path. Footways are ways meant for foot travel, paved or crushed stone or compressed earth. It assumes some extra construction beyond a hiking trail path. You can assume footway to be surface=paved or paths to be surface=dirt or earth and render surfaces differently.

I think the color changes are too drastic, I have thought about the problems and have a solution to them that is closer to the current color scheme.

1.Landuses should be lighter in color than highways, lighten the forest and wood area and darken the green motorways. The dark blue highways should stay as they are quite visible over waterways.

2.Keep the red footways, render paths as red dashes and pedestrian as smaller red ways with red polka-dot filling as with pedestrian areas. That way all foot based travel will have a more unified feel but mostly stay familiar. Footways can have a white background with the red dots to provide the proper contrast needed as with the other pedestrian ways and paths.

Try these suggestions and compare them to the current proposals, I think this is the best way to keep the current look and feel of the carto style while fixing existing issues. There is a certain charm to the style with all the colors used and specifically the blue highways which ties it to older paper road atlases. It also looks so distinct that it is easily recognizable. I appreciate the work you have done so far and your effort to engage the community and reference and compare changes.

Did you forget to post a picture or link or was this a test post?

I would use the rule of thumb of commuters, do they have large commuter population that commutes to a nearby city, if so it is a Suburb. If they mostly work and stay in place it is a village. Suburbs assume a connection to a city which is one of the main defining features. I hope this helps.

zmmalik The only thing that really matters is which government actually controls the territory in question not on paper. Which government has military bases, offices and collects taxes in the region.? If the answers to that are Pakistan then there is a mistake if the answer is India then there is no mistake. OSM can’t go into this country claims this on paper or that on paper this only leads to endless disputes because by the very nature the other side would dispute any claim just as strongly and it will go no where. By deciding based on ground truth it sidesteps the dispute and distills the answer to objective verifiable facts not opinions and claims. I hope you can see why such a position is needed and useful and how it isn’t a political decision.

When boarders are concerned and there are disputes OSM has a neutral principle that seeks to solve disputes. that principle is ground truth. If I were to go to any of those places who would be in control, which military, government offices and other administrative systems have a on the ground control there. I don’t know about the specifics in your cases but you would only have a case with OSM on the grounds of ground truth and not an organization that just proclaims whoes land it is irrespective of ground truth. Now the only exception to ground truth would be in areas where it is constantly changing from day to day. So don’t look at these borders like OpenStreetMap is taking a side it isn’t it just seeks to describe what is.

I think the mile mark could be implied based on length you may need to designate which side to count from, however I think that can be implied based on the first Exit. The thing is how accurate are the signs posted.

There is some time lag between implementations, some update faster than others. Another thing is you may have the older tiles in your browser’s cache and are not getting the newer tiles. Try clearing your browser’s cache and reloading the site.

This is simple, ground truth who controls the area? OSM doesn’t care what is on paper on some bureaucrats table ground truth is king. Now if the UK has a presence there controlling the area then it should be tagged as part of the UK, if Spain is controlling the area then Spain should be tagged as controlling it. If the UN it’s opinion amounts to the opinion of a cockroach compared to ground truth.

There are a couple things you can do the easiest is when in the iD editor you just drag the GPX file from your computer on to the browser window. The other way is to go to iD layers button on the right side then check the local gpx button towards the bottom. I hope that helps.

Thats nice to hear you are exited and enjoy your mapping. Keep up the good work and have fun. ;)

I have the schools as areas, amenity = school all the name and main tags are added to this area. then inside the area I tag the building as building = school. If you want an example look at this one, feel free to open it up in your editor to see how it is tagged, if your editor isn’t up to it you can try getting your feet wet in JOSM.

I don’t see relying on Google as being a good thing. With the recent information Google has been complicit in betraying it’s userbase. Furthermore relying on proprietary solutions leads to too much dependence and in a situation where you need them more than they need you and they can change or drop the service(as Google recently has done with their feed reader). Now what other options are there? Mumble is one, while it is mostly voice, it is almost like a voice IRC and can easily be exported and saved as records for later. It uses the new Opus codec which allows CD quality voice at low bandwidth and low latency you really feel like you are in the same room the latency is so low.