Add rendering of aerialway = magic_carpet

[pluimpje]

Expected behavior

show these the same as aerialway=drag_lift

Actual behavior

nothing is shown

Links and screenshots illustrating the problem

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/45.25219/6.25906
it is more visible https://slopes.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=18!45.2526!6.2601 (the way up is not shown here)

[kocio-pl]

Sounds sane for me, could you prepare a code for this feature?

[HolgerJeromin]

Magic carpets are mobile things (removed after snow) for winter sport only. I would not recommend rendering in this map style.
Would be very confusing when visiting this meadow in summer

Ref #3156

[HolgerJeromin]

Snowmap has a better rendering:
http://www.opensnowmap.org/mobile.html?zoom=14&lat=47.14892&lon=13.063&layers=snowbase
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/560775070

[pluimpje]

Holger,

might be the case for some of them, but the onces I'm referring to are definitely not removed in summer (http://img.over-blog-kiwi.com/1/58/19/42/20160423/ob_840a61_regis-moalic.jpg).

Is there a way to differentiate both kinds?

[HolgerJeromin]

Are you sure this one is there in summer? Where is that? Can you provide an aerial image (google maps) from such a location?

If they are really not removed they could be tagged as seasonal=no, but this is not documented imo.

[pluimpje]

https://www.google.be/maps/@45.2525592,6.2597532,293m/data=!3m1!1e3

and I've found a video about the construction (which was done in summer) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqB0Xo2ptVw

[ghost07tula]

Magic carpets are not always mobile. In general, they are stationary. I.e.: I personally often visit Arkhys and Krasnaya Polyana resorts in Russia and Vallnord in Andorra and magic carpets are on the same places year to year.

[HolgerJeromin]

@ghost07tula
every year on the same place: yes (would be better not to map otherwise)
always visible (aka also in summer): no with many of them

[ghost07tula]

@HolgerJeromin "always visible".

Yes, resort operators usually remove them for summer season for some reason.

[Adamant36]

Anyone know what the status of this is considering some are removed and some aren't? Id like to work on it if its doable or have it closed if not.

I don't think they should be rendered if they are only temporary. Unless they could maybe be tagged as seasonal or something and rendered that way somehow.

[HolgerJeromin]

As I wrote I am against rendering them when they are not there more than half of the year.

And IMHO for the few carpets left (how many are there world wide?) it adds too much complexity for this general style.

[Adamant36]

I agree. Its something better for a specialized map style. @kocio-pl, do you mind closing the issue?

[imagico]

For potentially renewed discussion (see #4650):

Tag is used 2208 times, exclusively on ways, almost exclusively in the skiing context, mostly short features (<100m).

There is some very small volume use for

• what is otherwise tagged as highway=footway + conveying=yes (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:conveying)
• what is otherwise tagged man_made=goods_conveyor

[AntonioLagoD]

Since #4649 is closed, I want to bring new arguments to reopen the issue. I was not a contributor to OSM in 2018.

I my opinion and by my experience hiking and biking, most of these are permanent structures like chairlifts, drag lifts and gondolas. It's easy to see in google satelllite maps in most ski resorts.

I am proposing a change for rendering them adding only two lines to aerialways.mss . It would render magic carpets just as drag lifts.
Not rendering these structures will remain in a lack of precision. Most of them are in the mountain all year round and could be references and obstacles I'd like to see in the maps.

I include some link to google satellite images showing magic carpets out of winter season:
https://www.google.es/maps/@40.3306288,-7.6140685,213m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=es&authuser=0
https://www.google.es/maps/@43.0544945,-5.395534,72m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=es&authuser=0
https://www.google.es/maps/@43.0425248,-5.388355,86m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=es&authuser=0
https://www.google.es/maps/@43.0365816,-5.39643,61m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=es&authuser=0
https://www.google.es/maps/@42.7029954,-0.2745188,244m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=es&authuser=0
https://www.google.es/maps/@42.7781262,-0.4109055,290m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=es&authuser=0
https://www.google.es/maps/@42.568172,1.641459,146m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=es&authuser=0
https://www.google.es/maps/place/6450+S%C3%B6lden,+Austria/@46.9767072,10.9741966,135m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x479d325b54281ac7:0x4d28dbae2ec3df3f!8m2!3d46.9654937!4d11.0076232?hl=es&authuser=0

Cheers,
Antonio Lago.

[HolgerJeromin]

I my opinion and by my experience hiking and biking, most of these are permanent structures like chairlifts, drag lifts and gondolas. It's easy to see in google satelllite maps in most ski resorts.

For sure when you are hiking and biking most of the magic_carpets you see are permanent. (no insult intended)

This places have each more than 4 carpets
https://www.google.de/maps/place/87561+Oberstdorf/@47.3988339,10.2454696,415m
https://www.google.de/maps/place/5630+Bad+Hofgastein,+%C3%96sterreich/@47.1695952,13.0967127,527m
https://www.google.de/maps/place/Huberhof+Vals/@46.8491679,11.6251765,282m

So we need something to differentiate both types.

[imagico]

Reopening as the main reason for closing was that the majority of features were previously considered to be seasonal - not only in operation but in their physical presence. This might not be the case an more. That does not mean we have necessarily agreement that this would be good to render.

Unfortunately there is no tagging established so far distinguishing between temporary and permanent installations.

If someone wants to work on rendering this i suggest to:

• consider the typical size of these in rendering.
• consider that these are very different in meaning both to the user (in winter) and when it is not operational (as an obstacle) compared to actual aerialways in the true sense of the term.
• consider that rendering these but not rendering highway=footway + conveying=yes in a distinct fashion would probably lead to a problematic mapping incentive.

I am removing the 'good first issue' label - not to discourage anyone from working on this but to make it clear that this is not a simple thing to make work in a good way.