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

tracks on other paths than streets not highlighted on the map #324

Open
joshinils opened this issue May 12, 2021 · 14 comments
Open

tracks on other paths than streets not highlighted on the map #324

joshinils opened this issue May 12, 2021 · 14 comments

Comments

@joshinils
Copy link

joshinils commented May 12, 2021

when i look at https://kartaview.org/map/ it appears as if the blue lines only show up for streets, not paths or otherwise accessible ways (for bicycles, at least)
for example: https://kartaview.org/details/3580373/2172
only shows up when i zoom in far enough for the green dots to appear.
I would like for every track to be shown like the green dots, even at lower zoom levels, especially at higher zoom levels.

@joshinils joshinils changed the title tracks on other paths than streets now showing up on the map tracks on other paths than streets not highlighted on the map May 18, 2021
@joshinils
Copy link
Author

For example: https://kartaview.org/details/3582857/10787/track-info
There, i rode on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/41211940 which is further south than the highlited franziskastraße above it.

Or does this have to do with me passing both the franziskastraße and utestraße at https://kartaview.org/details/3582857/11798/track-info ?
and since https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/59454315 is a path it does not show up in blue

@nakic
Copy link

nakic commented Feb 25, 2022

I have the same problem. I'm systematically mapping pedestrian paths, riverbanks, playgrounds etc. as well as roads, and this not being able to see the images on the main map is a significant issue. I'm promoting the imagery in a community of ~100 people in local councils and not being able to see imagery taken further away from streets may be the obstacle that just might make it too much for them too use.

@joshinils
Copy link
Author

yeah, zoom 18 and higher show the green dots at the exact gps location of the images. not really useful at all

@brmonaghan
Copy link

I agree with this too! I have multiple tracks from KV that I cannot see without going to the right. Spinning error also occurs too with clicking on a track and spinning cursor appears for a few seconds and goes away. Also, tracks need to be on the path. @zhaitianduo any word on when this will be resolved? 🤔

@zhangtiedong0912
Copy link

zhangtiedong0912 commented Mar 14, 2022

@joshinils thanks for you feedback. KartaView will use original GPS info match road network. you will see the blur line (Actually the purple) if match success. you will see the green dots if match failed. So the blue lines only show up for streets and only show the unmatched points when zoomlevel > 18 .

@zhangtiedong0912
Copy link

We will redesign in api V2, expectations can lead to a better experience.

@nakic
Copy link

nakic commented Mar 14, 2022

@zhangtiedong0912 Thanks for the clarification.

This looks a bit better than before: I don't think I could see the green dots at zoom > 18 before, so I imagine you made improvements there: thanks!

It has glitches, though. For example, I recorded a track along a stream bank which seems to abruptly end at the north end, when it's clear from track photos that imagery is available for another few hundred meters north. I imagine this has to do with snapping images to a nearby road when one is close. I understand the value in snapping to roads, but it'd be useful to either refine the snapping algorithm or to have an option to avoid snapping.

Finally, it may make sense to show off-street images shown at lower zoom levels as well, perhaps using a different colour, depending. It'd sure be useful for my use case (using imagery to support local council work), but there might be others interested in this, as well.

@zhangtiedong0912
Copy link

@nakic hi your guess is right. Now just use gps do match work. Improving the match algorithm has always been a challenge
about show off-street images, Thanks for you suggestion , i will discuss with our team.

@nakic
Copy link

nakic commented Mar 14, 2022

Thanks for the quick reply!

Just to add another suggestion that might be of help, perhaps a pragmatic solution might be to allow users who upload tracks to label a track as "on-street" or "off-street", with "on-street" as the default (currently hard-coded), so that pure GPS is used for off-street imagery. (In general, being able to edit track metadata (e.g. name) would be lovely, but that's another story. )

@zhangtiedong0912
Copy link

zhangtiedong0912 commented Mar 14, 2022

@nakic i think you mean like this .
image

@nakic
Copy link

nakic commented Mar 14, 2022

Yes, something like that, but that's only in the mini-map.

My impression is that the user uploading the imagery knows how the data should be viewed and that if uploader says "this is off-street, use GPS only", than that would be the way the imagery would be shown in the main map.

Alternatively, if there was a "use original location" control in the main map, that would be a good option, as well.

I say all this knowing full well that you have a much clearer idea of what your users ask for: I can only assume that and talk about what would be useful for users I'd like to bring to KartaView.

@zhangtiedong0912
Copy link

i see , thanks again

@joshinils
Copy link
Author

hmm, so bike-tours taken to make images which include streets and forest-paths would need to be split and each uploaded separately? or would the detection be based on what kind of path is in the vicinity? would it be possible or helpful to tell kartaview which type of vehicle was used when taking the images? like a car or bicycle (which then may include paths accessible to bikes)?

@zhangtiedong0912
Copy link

@joshinils hi ,this feature is not currently supported. It is still the general processing logic

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants