search

Esri / arcgis-osm-editor

ArcGIS Editor for OpenStreetMap is a toolset for GIS users to access and contribute to OpenStreetMap through their Desktop or Server environment.
Apache License 2.0
397 stars 130 forks source link

(Multi-)polygon relations for NPs and protected_area with "type=boundary" not inserted in polygon table #63

Closed mboeringa closed 9 years ago

mboeringa commented 9 years ago

Hi,

Working on my OSM Renderer for ArcGIS, I discovered that the ArcGIS Editor for OpenStreetMap's "Load OSM File" tool, doesn't insert (multi-)polygon relations defined with type=boundary into the polygon table / Feature Class (Openstreetmap-Carto / Mapnik OSM Standard does). This especially affects National Parks and protected areas, as these are defined as part of the boundary key (the issue may be affecting other, or maybe all, types of boundary=x, I haven't checked this):

E.g. boundary=national_park type=boundary

and

boundary=protected_area type=boundary

should both be inserted into the polygon table. Currently, only the outline is stored as part of the line Feature Classes.

This is correct tagging. Please see the http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary webpage. Also note that the above tagging can be replaced by type=multipolygon instead of type=boundary, and these should be inserted into the polygon table too. Essentially, these two tagging schemes are equivalent as regards to National Parks and protected areas, and should both be treated the same.

So:

boundary=national_park type= _boundary_

and

boundary=national_park type= _multipolygon_

and

boundary=national_park as one simple closed way

should all be inserted into the polygon table / Feature Class.

Currently, only the last option of National Parks and protected areas defined as simple closed ways without a type=multipolgyon or type=boundary seem to be correctly added to the polygon table.

Actually, ironically, OSM Standard / Mapnik is currently affected by the opposite bug: on OSM Standard, National Parks and protected_areas as simple closed ways aren't being rendered. This is an open issue on the Openstreetmap-Carto Github repository, for your reference: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1141

The images below illustrate the problem. The first image shows a National Park as rendered on OSM Standard. The polygon with label Cornwall AONB is actually part of a larger relation with multiple separate closed ways, that you don't see in this image (link to this image and relation: http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3126721#map=13/50.8873/-4.5387). The second image shows a screenshot from ArcGIS, with the polygon Feature Class enabled. Note there is no object / polygon here (in case this National Park was defined as a simple single closed way / no relation with boundary=national_park, there would have been a polygon, because those are correctly handled). The last image shows the line Feature Class, that shows the same object (OSMID 3126721) was inserted into the line Feature Class, but not the polygon Feature Class.

boundary_relation_national_park_in_osm

missing_national_park_in_arcgis

boundary_relation_national_park_in_arcgis

ThomasEmge commented 9 years ago

Thanks for the very detailed error description. Yes, you have indeed found an issue in the current released version. The issue has been corrected and is submitted in the source code. We plan to have a new release for January that will then include the fixes.

np

mboeringa commented 9 years ago

OK, good to hear that.

I also reported a major issue to Christine with a severe crash which is probably ModelBuilder related, and that has prevented me from upgrading to 10.2.2. I get a major crash in 10.2.2 with a large "list of values" String variable in my model, and that one is absolutely crucial, as it defines the entire batch setup for the renderer. I had to downgrade to 10.2 again because of this.

We need to be in contact about that if my OSM Renderer for ArcGIS is still in ESRI's focus. I have been working fervently on it in the past months...

ThomasEmge commented 9 years ago

Could you please open an issue on github and I can take a closer look.

mboeringa commented 9 years ago

I don't think that would be wise at this point of time, at least not as a public Github repository. Even though I am close to finishing what I had in mind for a first release of this tool, there still is a way to go.

I also intend to contact Christine soon again, and share some of the latest rendering results as PDFs. I think you will all be pleasantly surprised by the latest rendering results, I have put a lot of effort in fine-tuning the renderer, adding new and adjusting existing render rules, and literally made hundreds of subtle changes affecting and enhancing the appearance of the maps.