

Organic Maps is better for “normal” users if you ask me. Osmand is better for pro users but quite clunky.


Organic Maps is better for “normal” users if you ask me. Osmand is better for pro users but quite clunky.


Where I live, there is a random collection of buses, all privately operated, with no route maps, no website, and no head office.


This is how I do it with iD and Relatify:


Make two POIs. Done.


I’m no expert but it’s what I’d go for!


I think you’ve mis-tagged that and it should be highway=milestone.


I read this this morning and was raging that they didn’t mention OSM at all in it!!
Wilmott worries that these maps, now dominant, lack information that more traditional maps like Britain’s Ordnance Survey (OS) still have: “An OS map shows you where a stile is for horses; I’m not sure Google Maps even knows what a stile is. When you’re surveying a space, you find that information but geo AI doesn’t have that information. I’m from Australia – you can look at a space where Google Maps might tell you to walk a route through tall long grass, but if you’re from a place you know: there will be snakes in there. Most of this kind of mapping, because it was developed out of urban maps, privileges urban information, not rural information.”


I use Organic Maps for daily use, and OSMAnd for outdoors activities like hiking etc. The added info and features in OSMAnd are indispensable for outdoors use.


Can you add BRouter into OSMand?


Well I live in an area with little to no previous mapping and I’m practically the only person doing the area. It’s good and bad at the same time! I can go for an extended survey and either literally put hamlets on the map, or go to towns with streets drawn in but no POIs. Or pore over satellite imagery and draw landuse in… or paths… or lakes… Neverending fun. I tell my friends it’s like doing a geo-sudoku.
As someone who exclusively uses iD to edit, can you please expand on how exactly RapiD is faster than iD? The AI features seem decent but what else is faster?
Thanks :)