Worldwide routable Garmin maps: Missing/incorrect feature requests

Typ file seems missing.
Maybe try a fresh download, if it still missing, you could post the download link here.

After downloading new map of Ontario (version 16-09-2015) problem solved.

In the version of 10-09-2015 were more strange things. In parks there were many watertaps instead of benches.

groen_duiven

Thats because I have to use other Garmin types to make some cycling features findable. I use parking for bicycle parking, normal car parks I have to shift to another garmin type, like towing truck :wink:
If the map does not have the original typ file, those “hacks” become visible. Maybe by some compiling error on the server of the map generation the typ file was lost?

Hi folks,

I downloaded the Lambertus osm_generic_new_gmapsupp.zip North America/Oregon Generic Routable (new style) and installed it on my Garmin GPSMap62st.

Looks really good, but I’ve noticed a couple potentially-missing items:

From https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/44.06379/-121.35297

leisure=playground [point]

From https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/44.2548/-121.1544

lines associated with aeroway [ways], though the labels appear

Ideas? Thanks!

Not all features found in OSM are being compiled into the Garmin maps. You would not be able to discern much on the map, if they were all there. I’m sure playgrounds are not included. After all, the Garmin maps are mainly intended for navigation.

The runways, however, should be visible, since their labels show up. I wonder whether that is a colour problem.

@beej71:
Leisure=playground is a feature that IS included, have a look at the polygon style
https://github.com/ligfietser/mkgmap-style-sheets/blob/master/styles/generic%20new/polygons

The problem with your shape is that you are using the highways also for the borders of the leisure=playground shape.
I don’t think this is common practice on OSM and should be avoided, at least it will lead to rendering issues on the Garmin maps. It will draw the ways first and then the processing stops, it does not expect that those ways double as line for other shapes as well. Only in certain features (plazas, parking lots etc) ways are rendered as polygon shapes too.

About the runway line type, I use type 0x27, which is visible in Basecamp.
https://github.com/ligfietser/mkgmap-style-sheets/blob/master/styles/generic%20new/lines

Maybe this line type is invisible on the GPS (I havent specified a shape for it in the TYP file), I will have a look on this issue on my Oregon.
If you want to experiment it yourself, I can recommend the TYP file editor Typviewer.

Oops, the shape I meant was referring to leisure=park which is rendered fine, my mistake.

You mean this feature https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3728637353

It should be rendered with leisure=playground [0x2c06 resolution 24] but I made point 0x2c06 invisible because it is also used for labels of leisure=park, garden etc otherwise it would clutter the map. If you give this feature a name the label would show up.

Cool. Thanks for the info! I’ll try to learn more about this to see if I can troubleshoot it myself, as well.

Cheers,
-Beej

Beej,
On my Oregon the type 0x27 (runways) were invisible too. Strange, because 0x27 was the default Garmin typ for runways.
Apparently something has happened in the firmware and those lines are not rendered anymore without a typ file?
Anyway, I added this type to the TYP file so next time it will be rendered on the device.
You can download the improved file here:
https://github.com/ligfietser/mkgmap-style-sheets/blob/master/typ/osm%20generic%20new/2000.typ (view raw to download it)

Thanks for reporting this!

Feature request …
We plot a lot of GPS tracks over here in the jungles of Thailand … To aid differentiating those that genuinely dead end, against those that just might have stopped for another reason (jungle canopy/cloud cover on traced tracks, etc), …when physically verified, we tag the last node as noexit=yes
Is there any way a small “no-through road” icon (similar to that used on road signs) can be added into the mkgmap latest style to pick up on this noexit tag, and have it display on the units at higher zoom levels ?

You mean a sign like this one?

The only problem I can see is that there is no universal sign that is used and understood everywhere. I wonder whether we could give it the name “Road ends” such, that it only shows when the cursor hovers above it. That way people can find out what it means, but the maps won’t be cluttered with redundant labels.

Only a name would be very difficult to find. I can make a small icon like this, but we unfortunately cannot control the zoom levels anymore in Basecamp and the newer devices (only in Mapsource), so it might clutter the map at lower zoom levels. Only if i make it very tiny it will be acceptable?*

*) I’m afraid it will clutter the map in areas like here: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/et1

This doesn’t look good… :frowning:

Very good examples. Thanks ligfietser. I was wondering whether this would happen. :confused: Is this rendered at the highest zoom only?

I don’t think they need to be findable.

Russ, try loading the data from overpass into a gpx file. You can then use Garmin POILoader to load them into your GPS.

Regards,
Peter.

No unfortunately not the highest zoomlevel (otherwise you would see much more pois, shops cafes parking lots etc).
At this lower zoom only the not supported poi types are rendered. Garmin does not have a default poi for no exit, so I have to use a marine or other poi type. Those poi types appear at lower zoom levels no matter what I have set in mkgmap. So yes, I think it’s better to download pois with overpass. Or create your own custom map with mkgmap.

Thanks for the replies… and Yes, I was wondering if it would add a lot of clutter in the cities. I have also taken a look at the wiki more closely, and after seeing that in encourages the use of the noexit tag where traced tracks disappear under clouds, then this would not really serve a purpose after all.
If by hovering the cursor, the text appears, then great, but in the mean time I appreciate the recommendation to make a POI file for Thailand and will implement that as a solution.
Rgds.

Could OSM Tags: boundary=administrative (with a place tag), place=locality and place=hamlet be translated into distinct garmin POI type codes? At present, (at least in the new style) they all appear to be assigned to 00b/00. This causes duplication and confusing rendering in some areas because (i) admin areas (with a place=locality tag) and localities are rendered with a dot, whereas they are intended as areas rather than point locations; (ii) an admin area is labelled by default at its geographic centre, which may be in rough topography away from the accessible or populated area locally recognised as a locality, or a named hamlet, which commonly shares the name of the admin area.

An example is the area around www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-28.4976/153.4969

Standard OSM rendering handles it well by showing admin area names only as boundary labels (and only at high zoom), and showing localities as areas (no dot). Admittedly, population centres such as hamlets, villages etc are also shown without a dot, but that works OK in Mapnik.

If these OSM tags were translated as separate garmin type codes, interested users could modify TYP files to eliminate the duplication of names and/or use label types that indicate the feature type.

Suggested translations are:
OSM boundary=administrative & place=locality: POI Type 01f/00 (county or parish)
OSM place=locality: POI Type 064/0a (locale)?
OSM place=hamlet; POI Type 00c/00 (town < 50K)

These features could then be distinguished with TYP entries like:

[_point]
Type=0x00c
SubType=0x00
;GRMN_TYPE: Small city or town center, typically less than 50K inhabitants/Non NT
String1=0x04,Small town
ExtendedLabels=Y
FontStyle=NormalFont
CustomColor=No
DayXpm=“3 3 1 1” Colormode=0
“! c #000000
“!!!”
“!!!”
“!!!”
[end]

[_point]
Type=0x01f
SubType=0x00
;GRMN_TYPE: County or parish center/Non NT, NT
String1=0x04,County or parish
ExtendedLabels=Y
FontStyle=NoLabel (invisible)
CustomColor=No
DayXpm=“1 1 2 1” Colormode=16
“! c #C0C0C0
" c none"
" "
[end]

[_point]
Type=0x064
SubType=0x0a
;GRMN_TYPE: Geographical Named Locale/Non NT, NT
String1=0x04,Locality
ExtendedLabels=Y
FontStyle=NormalFont
CustomColor=DayAndNight
DaycustomColor:#838383
NightcustomColor:#838383
DayXpm=“1 1 2 1” Colormode=16
“! c #C0C0C0
" c none"
" "
[end]

My suggestion is to set all of the above features to appear at about the same zoom level (around resolution = 18 or 19 bits), and not then disappear at some higher zoom levels (as occurs at present for some of these labels in BaseCamp, which may be a law unto itself).

Larger population centres are perhaps already translated into corresponding Garmin POI types (lifted from TYPViewer):
0x00100=Large city with >10 million inhabitants/Non NT
0x00200=Large city center, typically 1M+ inhabitants/Non NT
0x00300=Large city with a range of (2-5] million inhabitants/Non NT
0x00400=Large city with a range of (1-2] million inhabitants/Non NT
0x00500=City with the range of (0.5-1] million inhabitants/Non NT
0x00600=City with the range of (200-500] thousand inhabitants/Non NT
0x00700=City with the range of (100-200] thousand inhabitants/Non NT
0x00800=Medium city center, typically 50K-1M inhabitants/Non NT
0x00900=City with the range of (20-50] thousand inhabitants/Non NT
0x00a00=City with the range of (10-20] thousand inhabitants/Non NT
0x00b00=City with the range of (5-10] thousand inhabitants/Non NT
0x00c00=Small city or town center, typically less than 50K inhabitants/Non NT
0x00d00=City of unknown population/Non NT

I will add this as test:


(place=hamlet | place=locality | boundary=estate |  place=isolated_dwelling) & boundary=administrative [0x1f00 resolution 24]
(place=hamlet | place=locality | boundary=estate |  place=isolated_dwelling) & boundary!=administrative [0x0b00 resolution 24]

In the typ file 0x1f00 will be rendered in grey without dot. Resolution 18 might be useful in empty areas like yours but clutters the maps in highly populated regions like Western Europe. I noticed in your example there are a lot of single place=locality nodes as well as place=locality on boundaries. IMHO this should be avoided. You could make this single node part of that relation (as administrative centre) but with a locality this looks like tagging for the renderer.

Many thanks ligfietser,

What you have tested looks good to me. Your experience will be best in deciding appropriate resolutions. I don’t like labels to appear, then disappear, then appear again as one zooms in, but that may just be a glitch in BaseCamp.

From what I can see in OSM someone has added Australian level 10 administrative boundaries (parishes in government parlance, used mainly in property deeds these days) and left the place labels to default to the centre of each admin area (which is easy and sensible, but it does create confusion if the parish name is derived from another feature in the parish - which is common - and if both are rendered identically without user control). I take your point that in OSM the parish names could be anchored elsewhere. This is actually flagged as fixme in OSM, which does not trust the defaults, though an argument could also be made to leave all area labels in the centre of the area (or along the boundary as used by Mapnik).

Moreover, moving selected admin area labels to coincide with an eponymous locally-recognised ‘locality’ would not solve the problem that many admin areas share the name of a hamlet, village, or larger population centre located somewhere in the admin area.

So I think what you have tested is a good compromise. It renders the admin area labels in a distinct way. Sometimes we get two labels with the same name (see “Upper Main Arm”) but your tested method makes it obvious what kind of feature each represents. Also, by using a distinct TYP code you have allowed users to tailor (or not display) the admin area labels if so desired.

Your tested method does not distinguish between localities (areas, not necessarily administrative) and hamlets (small population centres at a ‘point’ location), which I think could be done usefully without clutter, but I bow to your experience.

Also your approach might be extended to places other than localities and hamlets (e.g. villages and towns). Billinudgel is the name of both a parish (admin area) and village, which is shown only on the village in your test above, though I am not sure why from the style information you posted.

Thanks again for all your work.

Just add a node with tag place=city|town|village|hamlet, and add it to the boundary relation with role “label”.
Both the node and the relation are representations of the same real feature, so the role is “label” and not “admin_centre”.

Mapnik renders as expected, nominatim understand the data as expected, and with maps compiled by mkgmap in the Garmin (at least in nuvi) the streets are assoociated to the right place, and if you ask the route to that place you are directed to the node.