What is the name of this map style?

[matkoniecz]

#103 (comment) has

Just as an aside, please refer to these stylesheets as "openstreetmap-carto", not "Mapnik"

by @gravitystorm

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto#openstreetmap-carto has

OpenStreetMap Carto

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/c4270e5ccc3b4486507cc0692eb4803203b94e72/DOCKER.md#running-openstreetmap-carto-with-docker has

OpenStreetMap Carto

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/c4270e5ccc3b4486507cc0692eb4803203b94e72/DOCKER.md#importing-data has

openstreetmap-carto needs a database populated (...)

[kocio-pl]

I think of it as "OpenStreetMap Carto", because "openstreetmap-carto" is just a technical limitation related to construction of URLs.

See also:

• https://github.com/giggls/openstreetmap-carto-de#openstreetmap-carto-german
• https://github.com/h5bp/html5-boilerplate#html5-boilerplate
• https://github.com/FortAwesome/Font-Awesome#font-awesome-v470-

In general it's not clearly named, since it's a standard layer on OSM.org and is often seen like this (hence "Standard" or "Mapnik" monikers just to differentiate it from other layers):

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Standard_tile_layer#Name

[matkoniecz]

And https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/RELEASES.md#notifications has openstreetmap-carto

Overall it is a low priority, but it would be nice to use one name.

[sommerluk]

The name always appears a little bit technical to me. And it’s easy to misinterpret because this style is really not the only style that used both, OSM and CartoCSS. But I also don’t know an alternative…

[skylerbunny]

I called it openstreetmap-carto on the Standard Tile Layer osm wiki page, BECAUSE of the comment that started this issue – which was directed at me – and because prior to that, said page was horrible about distinguishing this template and Mapnik at all. You have my Permission, if a name that is not 'openstreetmap-carto' is agreed on, to change any instance of it in the Wiki, because I'm probably the one responsible for that change in the first place.

The alternative was leaving the wiki alone, where it was pretty horrible about ANY distinguishing name, and often confused the various roles of the rendering engines, badly.

[skylerbunny]

One follow-up: whether we call it OpenStreetMap Carto, openstreetmap-carto, or TheHenHouse, anywhere this css style is referenced by "Mapnik" or "Standard" in a place it can be (like a readme or wiki, as opposed to an archived email thread), it should be changed to the agreed upon name.

1. Not having it consistently referenced makes it very confusing to find this project by name. Mapnik isn't 'this', and Mapnik and this project do completely different things. Unfortunately, as my experience in Render place names on areas the same way as on nodes #103 visually demonstrates, I learned this the hard way.
2. There may come a day when this style isn't the Standard layer. iD calls it 'Standard' for user convenience, but it may change.
3. If we come up with a good name for it that we all agree is the Name, a change request can be sent to iD (and osm.org) to tell them to call it that. 'Standard' is about as descriptive as calling a default choice in a dropdown 'Default'.

[kocio-pl]

The name "OpenStreetMap Carto" was added at the top of README file in the first commit ever and is human readable, so I think it can be assumed as a canonical name, not influenced by URL limitations and conventions (usually low letters and no space allowed).

[skylerbunny]

SGTM. In that case, there should probably be a pull request if necessary to change any plain text instance of it within the documentation here, and possibly other efforts beyond here (other projects, wiki, etc.) to make naming consistent.

[skylerbunny]

It also may be a good idea to suggest to openstreetmap.com and/or the iD project to call 'this', when referenced, 'OpenStreetMap Carto' and not say, 'Standard', 'Mapnik layer', or whatever else, when this stylesheet is the lowest level underpinning.

[kocio-pl]

I guess it's more or less clear now, so I close this issue.

[harry-wood]

The tricky thing is there's actually three different things which could be given different names in any given set-up: the rendering software, the stylesheet, and the instance/hosting of a tile service.

I think it's clear that it was a mistake to call this thing "Mapnik". You will still see that in places because that's what we called it for many years in the early days. We should definitely ask people to stop calling it that though.

"OpenStreetMap Carto" is the name of this github repo (occasionally hyphenated purely for technical reasons), and so this is the name of stylesheet (it's a CartoCSS stylesheet), and the "project" to develop the cartography here.

Then there's "Standard", which I'm not so sure about. It's certainly a name I have used a lot, and I think we could say this refers to the tile service i.e. "OpenStreetMap's standard tile service" (which uses the openstreetmap-carto stylesheet). ...but then again I have also joined in with muddying the water by saying things like the "OpenStreetMap standard stylesheet". And I ask myself if somebody set up their own Mapnik server running the openstreetmap-carto stylesheet, would they be wrong to refer to this as "OSM standard"? I think the way people use that name is a little bit muddled still to be sure.

[kocio-pl]

I guess you're right. Dropping of the "Mapnik" name is accelerating as we talk more about "OpenStreetMap Carto", so it's just a matter of time to eradicate it.

The difference between style and OSM.org deployment is clear from the context most of the time and is important mainly with technical questions - especially with bugs like #1465, which has nothing to do with a style and is dependent on a Mapnik (I mean real Mapnik 😄) bug on OSMF servers.

This way or another I consider this problem to be mostly solved.

[gravitystorm]

Then there's "Standard", which I'm not so sure about.

I take that to mean the map layer on osm.org since the layer menu is about the only place you'll find it written. You could rewrite history a bit, and say that the "Standard" map layer used to be powered by "OpenStreetMap XML" and is now powered by "OpenStreetMap Carto" and in future might be powered by something else.

Of course it's hard to distinguish between the map layer and the free service offered by OSMF. But imagine if the OSMF offered multiple map layers, only one would still be the "Standard" layer on osm.org, so in my mind that's where the name rests i.e. it's the name of the layer, not the service, and not the stylesheets.

In addition, you'll can note that none of the map layers on osm.org are the name of the underlying map style or stylesheet project. So it's not an anomaly to have "Standard" instead of "OpenStreetMap Carto", since there's also "Humanitarian" instead of "HDM-CartoCSS", "Cycle Map" instead of "OpenCycleMap" and so on.

OpenStreetMap standard stylesheet

Capitalise the "Standard" and "OpenStreetMap Standard stylesheet" becomes synonymous with "the stylesheet that is (currently) powering the OpenStreetMap Standard layer (which is OpenStreetMap Carto)".

And I ask myself if somebody set up their own Mapnik server running the openstreetmap-carto stylesheet, would they be wrong to refer to this as "OSM standard"?

It gets into splitting hairs quite quickly, because most people just don't care about the differences :-)

[imagico]

I have been contemplating about the best terminology to use when writing about map style topics quite a bit in the past and came to the conclusion that in the constellation we have you practically need at least two different terms to accurately refer to the style itself (in addition to terms for the software and deployment instance). I decided to aim at using two terms: OpenStreetMap Carto when referring to this specific style development project and OpenStreetMap standard style when referring to the default layer style of the OSM website. Like:

OpenStreetMap Carto uses red, orange, yellow and white colors for roads.

The OpenStreetMap standard style has a significant impact on how mappers in OpenStreetMap use tags.

My reasoning for this is that while the difference is likely lost to many people it is important to make this distinction - also within this project. Being the style chosen to be rendered on the OSMF infrastructure and prominently used on the OSM website is a privilege that has to be earned and every developer here should keep that in mind. Implying that OpenStreetMap Carto is automatically and permanently used by the OSMF tile servers and featured on the OSM website should be avoided because it can be considered presumptuous.

In addition, you'll can note that none of the map layers on osm.org are the name of the underlying map style or stylesheet project. So it's not an anomaly to have "Standard" instead of "OpenStreetMap Carto", since there's also "Humanitarian" instead of "HDM-CartoCSS", "Cycle Map" instead of "OpenCycleMap" and so on.

Somewhat off topic here - but i think the names used on the website could be improved. They clearly aim to be descriptive rather that being actual names but IMO too much try to be short at the cost of actually being less descriptive and inconsistent (use of 'Map' in two cases but not in the other two).

[kocio-pl]

Being the style chosen to be rendered on the OSMF infrastructure and prominently used on the OSM website is a privilege that has to be earned and every developer here should keep that in mind.

Off topic 1: I don't like to think of it in terms of privileges and honors. It's also a "privilege" for us that people do engage in designing and coding, which is not a given thing too. And we should be grateful for the data that can be styled... Well - it's a collaborative project and we just share different resources for the common good.

Somewhat off topic here - but i think the names used on the website could be improved.

👍

Stretching this off topic a bit more: maybe adding some basic links in the legend would be good to have (like where's the general description, where to report bugs or where's the full legend in our case).