Finland's railway lines carry no name at all #86
Labels
No labels
blocked
claude-wip
map-report
map:is
map:se
needs-review
No milestone
No project
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
art/ismap#86
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Found auditing every country against
docs/country-requirements.md(#77). Violates R93 — a label layer only one country populates is a parity gap, not a steady state.What the data says
Finland's railway network has no line names at all. Sweden names roughly three-quarters of its rail rows and Poland a quarter, so the style's rail labelling does real work in two countries and nothing in the third.
Why
fi_rautatie(MTK) carries geometry, not names — the same split Finland has everywhere else.docs/country-finland.mdalready states the general shape: names are a separate register of 1,172,377 labelled points, joined by nearest point filtered on the register's own type code (R92). The join simply was never wired forrailways.The fix
Add the name join to
railwaysinconf/fimap.yamlthe waywater_bodiesandstationsalready do it, filtered tofi_paikannimi's railway-name type code. Prefer Finnish per R92'sDISTINCT ONconvention so a bilingual line does not get two labels.Related, not included
Water names are the same class of gap and are already tracked in #21:
waterways.nameis 100% NULL foris,seandfi, andwater_bodies.nameis 100% NULL forisandse, against Poland's 87% river coverage. Fixing rail names here should reuse whatever join shape #21 settles on, or vice versa — they are the same mechanism against different type codes.Acceptance
SELECT count(*) FROM map_railways_12 WHERE country='fi' AND name IS NOT NULLis materially greater than zero, and no line carries two labels.Result is in #88 — #88; the review note is the PR description.