[mkgmap-dev] best practices for parcel data?

Sun Feb 16 01:09:30 GMT 2020

(Yes, I know parcel data does not belong in OSM.  I am not putting it
in, and not proposing to do so.)

I am making maps for a my etrex 30 with a Geofabrik extract of
Massachusetts in pbf, and files that I converted from MassGIS "parcels"
data, which is basically shapefiles with tax lots and also easements.

This results in polygons with tags variously as

  boundary=parcel
  boundary=easement

I have the following diff, which results in a contour that is pretty
visible and a very thin blue line that is "intermittent stream".  The
lot lines show as "contour line" and don't say depth on the Etrex 30.

I am not firmly attached to this; I'm looking for a reasonable way to
have lot lines and easements shown so that I can understand them.

I suspect I could pick some not-really-used codepoints and put in TYP
file content for them

Other than TYP, does anyone have suggestions for a good way to do this?
Is adding this to the default style sensible, because OSM doctrine is to
merge parcel data when rendering?  Or am I unusual and me carrying a
patch is better?

As always, thanks to everyone who has worked on mkgmap.  My MassGIS
shapefile to OSM conversion was some effort, but the mkgmap part was
easy.

    Greg


Index: resources/styles/default/lines
===================================================================

--- resources/styles/default/lines      (revision 4451)
+++ resources/styles/default/lines      (working copy)
@@ -248,6 +248,10 @@
 boundary=administrative [0x1c resolution 22]
 boundary=national [0x1e resolution 17]
 boundary=political [0x1c resolution 19]
+# 0x23 is depth countour - thin.  Wacky but useful.  0x1c is too heavy
+boundary=parcel [0x23 resolution 20]
+# wild guess
+boundary=easement [0x26 resolution 20]
 
 barrier=wall | barrier=fence | barrier=hedge | barrier=ditch {add name='${barrier|subst:"_=> "}'} [0x17 resolution 24]
 

