I have recently completed adding the footpaths to Fulham Cemetery. Some are paved with asphalt, and some are just grass. I have created both as Footpath, with Surface either Asphalt or Grass.
On the Standard map however, they look nearly identical. Other map layers too. This isn’t very helpful for users, since there is a major difference in reality, both in how visible and how accessible the paths are. Examples: paved path, grass path.
Have I created the footpaths correctly, and is there some way I can improve them?
Thanks for alerting me that I linked to the wrong layer view. I updated the link in my post. The untagged path is one that was done before me; I will fix it.
But the main issue remains. When you say, “this has bad impacts on path visibility”, I’m not sure whether you agree with me, or whether you’re saying that making them look more different would have negative consequences.
Thank you, I will have a look at the OSM Carto map styles.
Incidentally, this is how I’m currently using OSM (via Leaflet): https://trees.fulhamcemeteryfriends.org.uk/ I do have an extra layer you can turn on to increase path visibility.
It’s absolutely possible to create a map style (perhaps based on some existing map style, such as OSM Carto for raster map tiles) that has slight changes that make some things look clearer for a particular use case.
I would have thought that this is a better solution to your problem as changes to OSM Carto would make the global map style slightly worse for everyone else that does not have your specific requirement
.
There’s general agreement that the rendering of footways in Carto is sub-optimal. The most recent discussion, including proposed revised designs is here. This is marked as “input needed” and is the place to start if you wish to contribute.
Sorry, I’m not very technically adept. Are you saying that for my application I’d be able to use Overpass to make paths render differently from default? Would I be able to use that via Leaflet?
It looks like I’d need to run my own tile server, which is probably not an option for me.
.. and also uMap might also be helpful, depending on what you want to do.
It’d actually be good to know what solution you have now? I’m guessing that it’s something that incorporates a webview or a web page that links (via Leaflet) to OSM’s Standard Layer?
Are you interested in one area (e.g. London) or potentially the whole world?
If it’s just a small area then “locally packaging” some raster tiles becomes an option, without the need for a web server.
One other thing you can do is to replace Leaflet (for raster tiles) with MapLibre (for vector tiles, and keep the rest of your application the same. If you can find a source of vector tiles that includes surface info in them, you can create (or modify an existing) style to show that, without having to have control of a tile server, tile generation, etc.
In particular, how does the existing “paths and structures” layer work? It seems like you almost have what you need there already - do the black and green paths correspond to paved and grass?
The vector option through a json style is the simplest and easiest variable to apply. You simply need the right lines to make a small modification to one of the existing styles.
You could use the osm style from MapTiler; this style uses the tile schema from OpenMapTiles which admits paved and unpaved. If you want to go further and have total control over how each way and its features should look, we now have access to a fabulous resource offered by osm-us: openstreetmap us tileservice and Trails Vector Tilesets.
further harms visibility of paths and footways in area only with unpaved ones, especially ones over rock areas or wetland or other busier backgrounds :(
The “paths and structures” layer is an SVG layer that I converted from KML, exported from a custom Google Map. I think for now I will stick with this, and make some improvements to the SVG layer.
