Welcome to the forum and thank you for your statement, @afusalan !
To reiterate, if folks would answer this question it would really help me make progress on this issue.
2 Likes
Yes, I think the OSM standard style would be a great option.
3 Likes
Yes, OSM is much more detailed (and accurate) than Google in my neck o’ the woods.
5 Likes
Yes standard.
Offers more accurate data and more detail in regards to footpaths etc. Also permits better distingtion between land cover types.
Not having contour lines might be a drawback but personally I would be fine without.
6 Likes
Standard OSM would be good enough, thank you
3 Likes
Thanks for still having an I on this.
I too would love to see OSM tiles as an option. First because localisation in remote areas is much easier (much more details displayed than in GMaps) and secondly I’m a contributor xD
To answer your questions.
- keeping the GMaps and it’s satellite imagery is probably good or at least having a provider with sat images. In many parts of the world OSM is already quite detailed but I know some areas still have shortcomings. So having the option for both would be good
2)I looked at some of the different tile providers (https://leaflet-extras.github.io/leaflet-providers/preview/). Overall I personally would prefer the Standard OSM Mapnik tiles since they are the most detailed. But I understand that having hill shading/ contour lines is pretty useful. I just found a leaflet plug-in that seems to do hill shading (https://equinor.github.io/leaflet.tilelayer.gloperations/)
Esri provides some nice base maps as well (they seem similar to MapBox) and also has sat images https://www.esri.com/en-us/arcgis/products/arcgis-platform/services/basemaps
Both should also provide maps in local lanuage.
I think you could ask those bigger providers for a favour. For OSM mapping they already provide their services for free. Maybe they would be willing to do the same for iNaturalist.
3 Likes
Here is a quick comparison for detail of GMpas to OSM (in a well mapped area)
Geofabrik also provides a nice tool to compare different tile styles
https://tools.geofabrik.de/mc/#14/51.1158/13.8706&num=4&mt0=mapnik&mt1=thunderforest-outdoors&mt2=google-map&mt3=here-map
5 Likes
No idea how frequently they roll in new OSM data, or how accessible they are in China, so it’s not clear to me what the advantages over Google would really be.
@kueda re Mapbox, OSM update frequency is touched on at https://stackoverflow.com/a/61962116 no fixed time, but usually within a week or so. China access is not currently blocked. Advantage over Google would be OSM powered map data which in many places gives much more complete and accurate map data while still having access to satellite imagery, contours + hillshading. You also have less vendor lock-in, if you develop with Mapbox GL JS v1 using Mapbox services, it’s possible in the future to drop in replace the map service without re-writing the whole front end mapping code.
6 Likes
This banning of Google related stuff in China impacts heavily on iNat users there - I’ve been told that all the iNat elements otherwise work fine, but no map. Kind of limits the functionality of a species’ distribution. I would welcome a shift to a viable mapping alternative for iNat users in China - we would likely see many new users as a result. I agree with @kueda that having OSM as a base map option for areas where Google is blocked would probably be a viable option, bandwidth issues and traffic issues permitting.
6 Likes
The situation doesn’t seem to be the same for the android app and the website.
For the website: I find that in the mainland images as well as maps don’t load or load extremely slowly unless you jump the wall. Identify mode doesn’t seem to load any content and my personal feed is very slow but does eventually load (or is that just a cached version?). Other page elements seem to load. The GPS map alignment point seems valid though I usually enter location info manually anyway.
I have shown the app to local naturalists and they love the look of it but most mainlanders won’t be able to easily use it. I do support OSM or similar being added as that would certainly remove a barrier for app use. In terms of the website it seems that there could still be a barrier if the image loading issue is related to google hosting.
1 Like
I use iNat with Tor Browser and it loads most of the time, although sometimes I need to change the circuit. Chinese users could also use it.
Any update?
No, there isn’t.
Fair enough, it’s not a small thing to do and it must be balanced against many other priorities.
Not complaining just wanted to add how things have changed here in recent months. I would say (personally) the situation here is getting more difficult. Often every few hours maps are unavailable (and sometimes other resources). With patience I can work around it but when time is tight it turns from an annoyance to a hindrance.
On the uploading observations side I’ve found pinning locations is helpful for commonly visited locations.
1 Like
I would support it as a layer option, but I would not support a complete move over to OSM.
The satellite imagery what I use almost exclusively, and OSM doesn’t have that as an option. That in and ofitself is a complete deal killer for me.
The second issue I have with OSM is that while the information may be more accurate (not always, I’ve found that construction firms will sometimes place their planned projects into OSM long before they even have permission to break ground in an attempt to pre-justify the construction), I find the interface very ugly and extremely ‘busy’, which would make seeing pins and such messy.
The biggest issue is the lack of satellite imagery on OSM though. That’s absolutely vital to have, especially in the kinds of places I work where specific landforms and trees are the main way to identify a location.
Because of that lack I find OSM maps to be far less accurate than any system that uses a reasonably detailed satellite image.
6 Likes
No satellite imagery. Complete deal killer for me.
3 Likes
Same! I can’t imagine how difficult it would be to manually add a location to an observation without the landmarks visible on a satellite map. I know nothing about OSM, so I was neutral on this suggestion until now, but if the change would remove the satellite imagery I thoroughly oppose it.
5 Likes
I agree.