I have recently added some new footpaths to OSM and 3 archeological features (2 x ruined churches and 1 x wayside cross). One of the churches and the wayside cross (plus all footpath additions) are showing on the map but the 2nd church isn't showing. It is there on the data layer but not on the map. I've tried replacing it, copying the "good" church into the required location (then changing the tags) but I'm missing something here. I've tried editing the data using the OSM website and JOSM.

Can someone have a look at 50.3658353, -5.1341847 (Perran Sands, Perranporth, Cornwall UK) to see what I'm doing wrong?

Thanks

XG

asked 09 Jan '17, 13:34

xgraphica's gravatar image

xgraphica
26112
accept rate: 0%

Just a note: an easier way to point to an ares is to just copy this bit from the map view. http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=50.3658353%2C%20-5.1341847#map=16/50.3808/-5.1512

(09 Jan '17, 17:17) andy mackey

Esentially, because the standard map style chooses not to render the things that you have mapped. Using the map style that I normally use I can see these three nodes. Something more tailored to showing historical information may work for you.

My first thought for a public site that might show these was the historical objects map, but that doesn't seem to.

For info I'm seeing your 3 nodes on a map forked from what the "standard style" was several years ago, but there are no public tiles for that I'm afraid.

permanent link

answered 09 Jan '17, 13:50

SomeoneElse's gravatar image

SomeoneElse ♦
33.3k65347792
accept rate: 15%

Thanks for your explanation - If understand correctly, I need to find a symbol/reference that is acceptable to the standard rendering style.

(09 Jan '17, 14:12) xgraphica

Not really - the "standard" map style is designed as a general map style and some things won't show up on there by design (many of the things that I map regularly, such as public footpaths, offices and stiles, don't). Just use the best tags you can to describe what it is.

One other thought - if you can draw it as an area rather than just a node it'd be better, since that gives a better "real world picture" of the object.

(09 Jan '17, 14:17) SomeoneElse ♦

Hi, the data contained on the three nodes is mostly duplicated, it could all be contained on one node. Or if you decide to draw an area for the ruins all data could be contained on the polygon.

(09 Jan '17, 19:05) BCNorwich
Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:

×6

question asked: 09 Jan '17, 13:34

question was seen: 944 times

last updated: 09 Jan '17, 19:05

powered by OSQA