Newbie adding old river bed

General
1

Hi all,

I just started mapping, so please forgive me newbie questions :slightly_smiling_face:

I started a new project about WĂĽrttemberg (south-west Germany) and as first edit tried to add a historical river bed. Here is the water outline:

Two questions:

  1. I added start date to the new river bed and end date to the old one but the old one doesn’t show up on the map (yet). Is there some delay between commit and map update to be expected? (I know it takes time on OSM due to tile rendering, but wasn’t sure it’s the same on OHM)
  2. Any other recommendations or obvious mistakes?

Thanks!

2 Likes
2

Welcome David! Congrats on stepping into the fun world of historical mapping & thanks for not just creating a project page, but also visiting the forum. :facepunch:t2:

  1. Unfortunately, someone (me) clogged up the tiler with a couple of changesets just ahead of yours. This should not be happening, which we’re trying to fix, but getting it back up and running shouldn’t be that difficult. You can see that the edits are not in the vector tiles. Hopefully, this will be repaired tomorrow, but it will be fixed by Tuesday at the latest. Our apologies for this delay.

  2. When I looked at that way, I couldn’t tell where you found the historical shape of the river. Can you add a source=[source url] tag to the specific url of the map you used? I looked at the site mentioned on the project page, but I couldn’t find specific layer used for tracing. Including the direct link will help others understand where you got the shapes.

Also - your project looks ambitious. Your instructions for getting others involved are fantastic. Please let me know if you’d like to set up an OHM Tasking Manager project to support mapping Württemberg.

1 Like
3

Hurray, I can see it now!

When I looked at that way, I couldn’t tell where you found the historical shape of the river. Can you add a source=[source url] tag to the specific url of the map you used? I looked at the site mentioned on the project page, but I couldn’t find specific layer used for tracing. Including the direct link will help others understand where you got the shapes.

I added source=Historische Flurkarte WĂĽrttemberg 1:2500 1830-1880 to the water area and the building (but I think I forgot the river centerline). Would the map URL be preferable to a descriptive citation?

The URLs are hidden in the project scope description:

What would be the “canonical” source tag content in this case?

Also - your project looks ambitious. Your instructions for getting others involved are fantastic. Please let me know if you’d like to set up an OHM Tasking Manager project to support mapping Württemberg.

Yes, mapping all of Württemberg would be quite ambitious, I think I’ll start with my home town and a few villages around and try to motivate people to collaborate, no idea how successful that will be. I’ll look into the tasking manager and will keep you posted.

1 Like
4

I think so, but even the way you tagged it is great… The name alone sort of asks the user to go google it for themselves, and I’ve sometimes done just the name when I’ve been in a hurry. The URLs are preferable because it’ll take the next mapper directly to your source with minimal barriers.

if you wanted to go overboard, you could do:

source=[url to an image of the map or to the info page for the map]
source:name=[name, like you did above]
source:tiles=[url to the xyz tms or wms or wmts server hosting a georeferenced map]

And, the extra super-credit is to link to either wikimedia commons versions of the map (if high res enough) or to an Internet Archive link for the source map. That all said, again, what you’ve done is great.

If I had to choose one of the two links above as a canonical url, I’d go with the first one, as it includes the WMS endpoint on the page.

Thanks for such a thorough follow-up, thank you for using the source tag, and best wishes for your efforts!

1 Like