Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add rendering for roller_coaster #3596

Closed
geozeisig opened this issue Dec 26, 2018 · 29 comments · Fixed by #4666
Closed

Add rendering for roller_coaster #3596

geozeisig opened this issue Dec 26, 2018 · 29 comments · Fixed by #4666
Labels
new features Requests to render new features roads
Milestone

Comments

@geozeisig
Copy link

geozeisig commented Dec 26, 2018

The track should be mapped with roller_coaster=track. An example is this and there are even more next door. A narrow black line should be drawn on the map. At the moment, unfortunately, many use railway=* to get the track rendered. On the Key:attraction-page this is expressly disapproved (Do not tag them as any railway!). Since the track is meandering the name should not be placed here.
For the attraction, another node or area should be drawn on which the name stands. The name should be added in black. You could also add tourism=attraction, but that would be too much importance to the roller coaster.

@kocio-pl
Copy link
Collaborator

I guess for this rare type of objects it's enough for rendering with 920 uses:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aroller_coaster%3Dtrack

taghistory 35

@kocio-pl kocio-pl added the roads label Dec 26, 2018
@kocio-pl kocio-pl added this to the New features milestone Dec 26, 2018
@matthijsmelissen
Copy link
Collaborator

I think this is quite specialized, and I'm not sure about rendering it on a general purpose map.

@Adamant36
Copy link
Contributor

Adamant36 commented Dec 26, 2018

@matthijsmelissen, personally id disagree. They aren't any specialized then other similar things like racing tracks or water slides that are already rendered. Also, they can take up fairly large areas, where you can't go under or around them safety reasons. So without rendering them your essentially advocating for large blank spots, that look like places people can go when they aren't.

Not to mention as the issue states anyway, they are already being rendered through wrong tagging anyway. So its just fixing miss-tagging if nothing else.

@pkoby
Copy link

pkoby commented Dec 27, 2018

On the Key:attraction-page this is expressly disapproved (Do not tag them as any railway!).

The https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dtheme_park#Related_tags page lists railway=narrow_gauge as what is to be used until railway=roller_coaster is a thing. So I guess one of those pages should change (probably this one?).

@HolgerJeromin
Copy link
Contributor

They are quiet big and good for orientation.
A full mapped theme park would look empty without a rendering.

@polarbearing
Copy link
Contributor

Summer toboggan #3436 and Rollercoaster #3596 should be considered together. The carriageway could be rails, an ice or a water channel, for which all the same kind of line can be rendered.

Question is if we need an icon, and how the ground is rendered where the carriageway is built on.

@matkoniecz
Copy link
Contributor

I would consider rendering track with one of railway styles. In the ideal world it would not be shown on general purpose map but unfortunately tagging for renderer is extremely popular here.

Unfortunately, it seems that choice is between "render roller coaster track" and "render roller coaster track mistagged as railway".

@meased
Copy link
Contributor

meased commented Jan 25, 2019

We already render railway=miniature, and a roller coaster track pretty much is a miniature railway.

@jeisenbe
Copy link
Collaborator

jeisenbe commented Jan 25, 2019 via email

@filips123
Copy link

@meased

Do not tag them as any railway!

As you said, a roller coaster track pretty much is a miniature railway. So you could just render roller_coaster=track similar to railway=miniature.

@jeisenbe
Copy link
Collaborator

jeisenbe commented Apr 8, 2019

I've looked into the use of attraction=roller_coaster and roller_coaster=track in the context of deciding what tags to import as polygons during the next database reload. Both tags are frequently used to tag the tracks of roller coasters. Attraction=roller_coaster is mapped as an unclosed way 1,572 times (8-April-2019) and roller_coaster=track has 1483 uses on unclosed ways, so the two methods of tagging are about equally popular.

For rendering the track there is no problem about the database, because ways are imported as linestrings by default. If we want to render the label of the attraction based on polygons, this would require a change, however.

I would recommend that @geozeisig reopen the proposal process for roller_coaster=track with a RFC (request for comments) on the tagging mailing list, and then get it voted on. Then we might need to wait till roller_coaster=track is clearly the more popular choice (assuming that this is accepted by the community)

One issue to consider is how the routes of other types of attractions should be tagged and rendered. Currently, "attraction=dark_ride", "=river_rafting", "=summer_toboggan", "=train", "=water_slide" and "=slide" are usually mapped as open ways and the ID editor supports this for all except slide (and roller_coaster).

River_rafting and water_slide are often mis-tagged as waterway=canal for rendering, and it would be good to develop a rendering that would discourage this practice.

In particular, attraction=train might need to be considered along with roller coasters, but it's unclear what this tag means.

@jeisenbe
Copy link
Collaborator

jeisenbe commented Sep 5, 2019

I'd support using the same rendering at railway=miniature since both features are usually tourist attraction railways which loop around in a small area. That tag renders at z15 currently, but it's possible that roller coasters should not render until z16. This would need testing.

However, as I mentioned above, we should clarify if roller_coaster=track is the preferred mapping method for this feature, rather than using attraction=roller_coaster on the tracks.

@jeisenbe
Copy link
Collaborator

Now 2/3rds of ways are double-tagged with roller_coaster=track + attraction=roller_coaster - 2062 ways compared to 2800 unclosed ways for both tags individually. I'm not sure why they are being double-tagged in this way, @geozeisig do you know?

@geozeisig
Copy link
Author

I can not explain it either. The wiki is clear. Now I asked a couple of people why they do it that way.
If roller_coaster=track not rendered I understand that railway=* is added. When the topic is solved we will have to revise the data again.

@DaveF63
Copy link

DaveF63 commented Jun 10, 2020

I support the rendering of this feature. They are contained within specific areas so no overlapping with other 'general purpose' features. Miniature railways & waterslides, of similar size & locations are already rendered. Using the same render as railway=miniature way seems appropriate, but with a 'bridge' style edging to indicate it is elevated.

@geozeisig
Copy link
Author

There are now more than 3,500 applications
taghistory

@DaveF63
Copy link

DaveF63 commented Jun 11, 2020

@geozeisig And that's only the correctly tagged ones. There are many falsely tagged as railway=* to force the rendering.

@Adamant36
Copy link
Contributor

@geozeisig And that's only the correctly tagged ones. There are many falsely tagged as railway=* to force the rendering.

There's 87 instances of attraction=roller_coaster + railway=miniature. Which isn't to many, but it would still help if they were tagged correctly and there's probably more out there without the attraction tag.

@01110229
Copy link

Bump, proposal to render the same way as railway=miniature.

@Adamant36
Copy link
Contributor

Bump, proposal to render the same way as railway=miniature.

I'd be interested to know what the tagging numbers for the various options are now. Maybe someone can create a graph or something?

@01110229
Copy link

01110229 commented Oct 21, 2021

I'd be interested to know what the tagging numbers for the various options are now. Maybe someone can create a graph or something?

  • roller_coaster=track currently at 5 166 uses
    • roller_coaster=track & railway=light_rail at 56 uses
    • roller_coaster=track & railway=miniature at 49 uses
    • roller_coaster=track & railway=monorail at 103 uses
    • roller_coaster=track & railway=narrow_gauge at 754 uses
    • roller_coaster=track & railway=rail at 29 uses
    • roller_coaster=track & railway=rollercoaster (?) at 5 uses

For roller_coaster=track:
obraz

@Adamant36
Copy link
Contributor

Hhhmmm, thanks. Roller_coaster=track is the clear favorite there and 5,166 uses should be enough to justify rendering it.

@spookypeanut
Copy link

I just noticed that a rollercoaster I added is not getting rendered, and that brought me here. Looks like the consensus is that it should be rendered, but doesn't look like it got any further (please correct me if either of these are not the case). I'm a bit of a dev (but have never looked into osm code), so I might consider figuring out how to create a PR for this if I get time

@mxxcon
Copy link

mxxcon commented Jul 10, 2022

I support the rendering of this feature. They are contained within specific areas so no overlapping with other 'general purpose' features. Miniature railways & waterslides, of similar size & locations are already rendered. Using the same render as railway=miniature way seems appropriate, but with a 'bridge' style edging to indicate it is elevated.

Apologies if I'm misunderstanding what you said but there are situations where a rollercoaster is not an exclusive feature at a given location. I know of rollercoasters that have food vendors and other attractions and features below the tracks. Additionally I know of a location that's building a rollercoaster intertwined with a log flume ride.

@DaveF63
Copy link

DaveF63 commented Jul 14, 2022

"'general purpose'"

@arminkollascheck
Copy link

arminkollascheck commented Aug 19, 2022

Still not included? Why does the change to render roller coasters takes so long?

For now there are multiple ways coasters get mapped in OSM, because there is no useable Line-Typ for the tracks that gets rendered.

@pnorman
Copy link
Collaborator

pnorman commented Aug 19, 2022

Still not included? Why does the change to render roller coasters takes so long?

There is no change that has been proposed - this is a feature request that no one has submitted a PR for.

@Roeliooo
Copy link

Hi Friends. What is the status of roller_coaster=track. Don't see it on the OSM map yet. Thanks.

@imagico
Copy link
Collaborator

imagico commented Aug 27, 2023

#4666 has been merged but we have not made a release since then so the change is not yet visible in the map.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
new features Requests to render new features roads
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.