Closed planemad closed 3 years ago
+1 to adding the OSM basemap, but I'd go further and say support https://github.com/osmlab/editor-layer-index. This brings in better/more recent imagery for local areas which make validation much easier without going out to other tools.
Another suggestion: Choose the basemap based on the "best: true" option that the editor-layout-index provides for an area.
This would make checking the changeset a lot easier since this image is more likely being used for the change itself.
I added Bing imagery and I tried to add the OSM carto style, but it now requires to inform a user-agent. I didn't find a way to do it with mapbox-gl. @tordans I like the idea of using editor-layout-index options!
I added Bing imagery and I tried to add the OSM carto style, but it now requires to inform a user-agent. I didn't find a way to do it with mapbox-gl.
@willemarcel can you use transformRequest
to add a header that the OSM operations team can whitelist?
transformRequest: (url, resourceType)=> {
if(resourceType === 'Source' && url.startsWith('http://myHost')) {
return {
url: url.replace('http', 'https'),
headers: { 'my-custom-header': true},
credentials: 'include' // Include cookies for cross-origin requests
}
}
}
I'm submitting a feature request
Brief Description
Currently the basemap for the changeset visualization are only Mapbox maps. Since these maps have only a subset of OSM features visible, often I open the changeset page to view current state of the rendered map on the OSM mapnik style.
If we have an OSM layer as a basemap style option, one can analyze the changeset within osmcha
What is the motivation / use case for this feature?
Other Information / context: