render highway=street_lamp at z=19

[dktue]

Streetlamps don't show up on the map, yet but I think it would encourage mappers to add them to OSM if they could see that they are actually being rendered.

At zoomlevel 19 this should cause no harm.

[sommerluk]

What is the average distance between two street lamps

Consider this place at z19: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/5.32128/-4.02055 If you have a street lamp each 10 m, than this would clutter the map a lot. Even with 30 m distance this would still be a clutter. Maybe z21 would work… (However, while this style has some support for zoom levels higher than z19, at osm.org is rendered only up to z19)

[dktue]

I tried to find the most densely tagged area possible where street lamps are tagged:

http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/zOi

The link shows a map at level 17. I guess at level 19 there would be not harm.

[sommerluk]

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/0.31746/32.59376

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-1.32357/36.83338

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-1.31072/36.77573

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/1.37768/103.85083

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/1.55494/103.63773

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-3.76087/-38.61526

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/5.33994/-3.98620

It depends on latitude. z19 isn’t the same scale in Germany than in Singapore.

[dktue]

I like your examples and I'd love to see a subtle streetlamp-icon in them like JOSM shows when editing data. :-)

[kocio-pl]

Maybe we should render them just like bollards, since in practice they are also the obstacle and sometimes the bollard in the row is omitted just because the lamp is there.

[kocio-pl]

Example of the street lamps being part of a bollard line - at z19 it makes perfect sense for me to show them the same:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.23969/20.99598

[pnorman]

What's the use-case for showing street lamps?

[dktue]

In some cities they are being used in emergency cases to locate the caller. To do this, the lamps are being marked with a big label containing a number.

On the other hand? Why show bollards that are not part of a highway=* ?

[dieterdreist]

sent from a phone

On 29. Jun 2018, at 12:49, Paul Norman ***@***.***> wrote: What's the use-case for showing street lamps?

what’s the usecase for showing aeroways?

[Tomasz-W]

I'm against. Of course, there are some places where rendering a lamp may be useful, but in 99% cases, it would be unnecessary map cluttering.

[dktue]

but in 99% cases, it would be unnecessary map cluttering.

But so are bollards

[Adamant36]

So are individual trees really. I think street lamps would at least be more relevent to render due to OSM being based on road mapping. At least street lamps play some part in that, unlike trees.

[Tomasz-W]

The only way that I see for rendering for strret lamps is to copy rendering of power poles, any stronger rendering of them would cause map clutter or mistaking with some kind of barrier on linear way

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3689285643

(generally I'm against rendering it, because I don't see any need for this feature on map)

[polarbearing]

I agree with those that say there is no need to render them.
But if we do, please not like bollards. One idea would be the dot in the middle and a transparent halo around, like trees but half the size.

[SomeoneElseOSM]

Here's another option if anyone wants to borrow it:

https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=19&lat=-25.00719&lon=135.176226
(as usual follow the links from the changelog to get to the respository)

[Adamant36]

@SomeoneElseOSM, have you found anywhere on your map where rendering them clutters things up to much? Do you have any opinion on if it would be an issue or not?

[SomeoneElseOSM]

I only show them from z19 and I don't think they cause a problem there. https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=19&lat=52.950124&lon=-1.162046 is probably the densest place I've found.

[Adamant36]

Thanks. It doesn't seem that bad at all. I really like how it looks with the icon.

[Tomasz-W]

Basing on comments and thumbs up/ down, there is 8 people against and 3 people supporting this idea. As I'm not a hard "Github democrat" , and I don't see anything bad in making some changes even if there is 1-2 more people against than a supporters, majority in this issue is too big to ignore.

To be fair with enthusiasts of adding rendering for street lamps, I propose you to show some test renderings with power pole-like rendering. Maybe miraculously opponents of the issue will change the mind. Then we will do a final discussion and decide what to do with it.

[polarbearing]

quick png mockup what I meant

[Adamant36]

@Tomasz-W, not that it matters, but I think its actually 4 in support, as I assume SomeoneElseOSM is cool with the idea. Since he has it on his style. I'm willing to do some test renderings with something resembling power pole if I can figure out the code. I'll even throw in a few tests of SomeoneElseOSM's icon for good measure. Maybe we can at least get enough new people in support of it for a tie. Then we can play rock, paper, scissors for it ;)

In the meantime, if anyone who is against it wants to find a place really dense with street lamps I can test that would be great.

[dieterdreist]

sent from a phone

On 1. Sep 2018, at 23:57, Adamant36 ***@***.***> wrote: but I think its actually 4 in support, as I assume SomeoneElseOSM is cool with the idea.

for the record, I fine with the idea of rendering it at high zooms, but it should be distinguished from barrier=bollard

[meased]

I'm still not sold on this, but just to play along, but what id @polarbearing's idea was modified with a yellow halo to look like light? Something like:

[kocio-pl]

The ideas are all quite nice and not obtrusive, however I need to see it on the test rendering to really know...

[dktue]

I like the right-most icon @meased and would love to see test-renderings (as colors might be difficult in general) ! :-)

But @SomeoneElseOSM 's icon is awesome, too and probably more robust.

[kolb-stefan]

I think the rendering of streetlamps is a good idea. With them it is much easier to see if a street, park or other region is lit.

[Adamant36]

@jragusa, is there a way that you propose we could render roads tagged with lit=yes on them versus showing street lamps?

[HolgerJeromin]

We could make a yellow border like the bridge. But with bridges this would be even wider and making clutter and complex code.

[Adamant36]

I was thinking something like that myself. It might be worth trying at least even with the problems if street lamps don't work out. It looks like the numbers are way better for it and still increasing. Whereas, it looks highway=street_lamp is starting to even out.

[polarbearing]

a) why yellow?

b) would colour-coded borders not be too much in the streets, when we also consider access and surface?

I'd imagine a separate layer, where you can switch the lights on or off.

[HolgerJeromin]

why yellow?

Because osmand does this when you want. :)
And red for =no

[jeisenbe]

OsmAnd is a great example of what you can show with a vector map that offers lots of options. Unfortunately this style is static. I don’t think it will look right to show lighting on all streets, on a general-purpose map. But if we ever get a client-side map, perhaps a vector-based style, on the main Openstreetmap.org site, I would suggest adding this as an option that can be turned on and off

[polarbearing]

when you want

yeah, these are the keywords. And I certainly do not want red borders along every rural road all the time.

[jragusa]

I tag street with the lit tag but I'm not convinced we should render this on openstreetmap-carto
style because 1/ it's not really necessary and 2/ it may create conflicts with other tags that we might be interested to render such as cycleways or sideways and I didn't even talk about parking lanes...

If you need to see the rendering of lit, I would propose to look at dedicated maps such as those provided by ITO Map (they have currently some problems to display maps)

[Adamant36]

The more time passes and the more I think about it, the less I think street lamps are worth rendering. At least in this phase of things, as the map is. I agree with @polarbearing that it would work well later on as a separate layer though, that can be turned on and off though. But we shouldn't force everyone else to see little yellow dots all over the place when they might want to. I feel the same about individual trees. Even if they look cool. I wish I was around back then to vote that one down, but I'll have to do the right thing on this one instead, by being against it for the sake of everyone else. Even if I might have liked the idea of rendering street lamps at some point. So, I suggest we close it for now and reopen it when the technology is better for rendering it.

[dieterdreist]

I am not a big fan of rendering street lamps, but doing it in zoom 19 is not a problem either. But I am a fan of rendering individual trees. These are a completely different thing, they are orders of magnitude more visible (significant volume vs. just a pole), and their positions indicate more than just "a tree" in urban settings (they are used to accentuate urban situations, corners, important roads, etc.), while they are nice for orientation in rural settings. Also, groups of trees create spatial structure (which street lamps do not at all, they are just poles).

[Adamant36]

@dieterdreist, I'm not against mapping individual trees that are significant some how to the landscape etc. Its something that gets way over done in some areas. Like at some universities in California or some places that should really be tagged as tree rows, but arent for some reason. If its to dense its almost the same problem rendering beehives would of had. I rarely just see a few important trees somewhere mapped though. Its always a bunch of them at a time, which makes them lose their significance, but that could just be California though. I thought I read somewhere that the tag was originally only meant for significant trees instead of every tree, but it quickly started getting miss used.

[polarbearing]

itoworld has an overlay that renders the lit tag.

[jeisenbe]

Since the simple bollard-like rendering was not recommended and rendering streetlamps without rendering lit=yes would encourage mappers to tag the individual streetlamps rather than adding the more useful information to the highway way, I'm closing this issue. See #3635 about adding a new, unique icon. However, the issue can be reopened if there are new ideas about how this could be rendered in a sensible way, perhaps only at z20 and above.

[jidanni]

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4734061770 is the only street light for miles around:
http://osmstreetlight.bplaced.net/#17/24.19792/120.87697 .
Yet it is not rendered, but instead just electric poles are. If you think about it taxpayers are paying for the streetlights, not the electric poles. And streetlights are the only thing you can see from miles away in the dark (night is half of one's mapping "day"): so fulfills "map what is on the ground" more. (In fact at night it is the only thing left (visible) on the ground here in the hills!) Don't get me wrong: 100% support for also showing electric poles (and telephone poles!)... Just please don't use a "city attitude" to important safety/landmark (night) features in the countryside! Thanks. (Sure, they cause light pollution, but are great for far-away azimuth checks, etc.)

[kresp0]

I love seeing the individual trees on the map. But for the street lamps, I would only like to see those at zoom ≥ 20 or maybe ≥19. Not sure how useful could be, but I believe that rendering street lamps would make the map more complete at higher zoom levels, without adding much clutter.

Also check out the area that @SomeoneElseOSM mentioned with HDM-CartoCSS or any other area with many lamps.

Lastly, check out the attached screenshots: I downloaded all the "light points" (including street lamps) from my City Council and loaded the 231k points into JOSM. Checked at zooms 17, 19 and 20. Please ignore where there are too many "lamps" together, as those are not really street lamps.

We could use the HDM-CartoCSS icon (CC0). It is clear, monochromatic and neutral (not on nor off).

[dktue]

The last map example looks like z19 to me and it looks good, not cluttered (at least to me).

[kresp0]

Added all those "light points" (including all the street lamps in Madrid) to a custom database that uses OSM for public ways and most of the rest of the features such as buildings and trees come from authoritative data sources. Tagged all "light points" with barrier=bollard, in order to check out how it looks with osm-carto. And to me, looks good. Check out the proof of concept.

Still think that the icon suggested above could work nicely too. But it would be more obvious, so not sure about that.

[HolgerJeromin]

And to me, looks good. Check out the proof of concept.

Perhaps a problem with the data here, but dots at the walls looks strange:

[kresp0]

Perhaps a problem with the data here, but dots at the walls looks strange:

Yes, there is a problem with the data ("light points") as it includes not only street lamps but also spotlight in monuments and other kinds of lights operated by the City Council. It has attributes to indicate what model of light point it is, but as there are hundreds of types I haven't bothered yet to try to separate the street lights.

Please ignore where there are many dots together as those are not really street lamps.

[HolgerJeromin]

But wall mounted streetlamps would render exactly the same.
Rendering them not would be confusing

[kresp0]

But wall mounted streetlamps would render exactly the same. Rendering them not would be confusing

That example you provided can give us an idea on how wall mounted streetlamps would render, but only if we look at the bottom left side of the building. The reason is that while there are quite a few wall mounted streetlamps on that particular building, there are even more than are not really streetlamps, as the purpose of those is to illuminate the building or monument itself, not the street.

BTW, that building was the City Hall from 1696 to 2007. No idea what are those "light points" inside the building.

[sommerluk]

As said above, in general I would be in favour of rendering this starting with z20, with an appropriate icon. If you could come up with a PR?

[BubbaJuice]

@sommerluk, I have a branch open with a rendering like that of natural=tree that is based off of meased's icon at zoom 19+ (although this could easily be changed to an svg, moved to 20+, or something else based on feedback). I can submit a pull request if you want.
You can find the branch here.
The comparison can be viewed here.

Here are some previews all at z19:

Tucson, United States:

Edmonton, Canada:

Paris, France:

[imagico]

Currently there is no consensus among the maintainers that rendering highway=street_lamp is desirable. The main arguments against it are:

• lack of usefulness for the map user.
• overcrowding the map and overloading an already stretched system of rendering POIs when rendered as part of the POI layers.
• lack of space in many cases on z<=19.
• competition with lit=yes on roads in mapping and selectively rendering just one variant, but not the other could be considered nudging the mappers.

Of course counter-arguments can be given against all of these:

• usefulness is entirely subjective, with a complete mapping of street lamps in an area and suitable display on a map the map user can get a very good impression what areas are lit at night, much more detailed than with the more generalized lit=yes. Since we render bollards the display of (free standing) street lamps could also be considered useful simply as obstacles/orientation points (i.e. a tall bollard).
• despite us not rendering highway=street_lamp and many mapping tools encouraging use of lit=yes mapping of highway=street_lamp remains popular without indications that it is becoming less so (https://taghistory.raifer.tech/?#***/highway/street_lamp&***/lit/yes)
• a compact non-blocking design is feasible - as it has been demonstrated by the French style (https://imagico.de/map/styleinfo/#style=fr&section=tags&key=highway&value=street_lamp)
• rendering highway=street_lamp does not rule out rendering lit=yes on roads (in a similar way as rendering of urban land uses and buildings is not mutually exclusive).

What @BubbaJuice has shown is an implementation of the non-blocking rendering similar to the french style. This is done above the POI and label layers - hence the light symbols cover these in some cases, which is not a good idea. Non-blocking symbols would have to be rendered before the symbol and label layers.

Also the dark yellow color is not very intuitive - as previous comments have already mentioned. It has very low lightness contrast with urban landuses and pedestrian roads - making the lighting aspect fairly non-obvious. The french style coloring works much better in that regard.

I have some time ago further compacted the french design in my style and use that starting at z19 - which IMO works reasonably even at dense low latitude settings:

This would match our approach to rendering trees where we also start early (z16) with a very subtle design and move to a more distinctive symbols as you zoom in.

See also a real world example at z19.

I am re-opening this to encourage renewed discussion but note that does not mean we have consensus among maintainers that this is desirable to render. So opening a PR at this time might be premature, further tuning the design concept shown and seeing if that convinces the maintainers this is a viable approach might be the more prudent approach.