<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 18/08/2015 07:43, Matthijs Melissen
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAD940Mo=oJd1AeWKSpw_FfaHOxkDjfY1d-Tf5zyOmqhtMYs+hw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p dir="ltr">On 18 Aug 2015 03:56, "Andy Townsend" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:ajt1047@gmail.com">ajt1047@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
> There's no interest to do this in the OSM "standard" style
because it is abundantly clear that any new attempts at changes
that make rural navigation possible* in OSM-carto would be
rejected based on the ones that already have been over the last
year. </p>
<p dir="ltr">This is not true, a different rendering based on
hiking routes or public rights of way is something we could
certainly consider.</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
As I said previously, changes such as this aren't really relevant
"if you can't see the paths themselves at all at a zoom level you'd
use for planning a route over them.". <br>
<br>
However, now you're saying "... a different rendering ...". In the
immediately previous message you said:<br>
<br>
"So far there is little interest to do this on the OSM default
render style which seems odd to me given how much fuss there has
been on this list to recent changes to the footway/path style (over
the last year)!"<br>
<br>
It is that was what I was replying to, explaining why there's little
interest to do that on the OSM default render style. Maybe that was
just a trolling question that I shouldn't have replied to late at
night :) Back in
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2015-August/017680.html">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2015-August/017680.html</a>
the first question I asked was "Are we talking about OSM-Carto
here?", because it was unclear what you were suggesting.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAD940Mo=oJd1AeWKSpw_FfaHOxkDjfY1d-Tf5zyOmqhtMYs+hw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p dir="ltr">Please stop antagonizing the default rendering as if
it is on a mission to make your life as hard as possible, it
comes across very childish and is a counterproductive way of
discussing.</p>
</blockquote>
I don't believe that I've ever made _that_ claim :)<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAD940Mo=oJd1AeWKSpw_FfaHOxkDjfY1d-Tf5zyOmqhtMYs+hw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p dir="ltr">> Although it hasn't been explicitly stated, the
direction of travel of that style is clear - some people want a
map style that's useful for navigation, others want something
that "looks nice"; based on comments on the issues raised it's
clear that the people maintaining the style are in the latter
group rather than the former. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Not true either - our main criterium for the recent
changes is "readability", and that definitely includes being
able to use the map for navigation.</p>
</blockquote>
Frankly, that's not what I'm reading from e.g.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/747#issuecomment-50188728">https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/747#issuecomment-50188728</a>
. <br>
<br>
As I've said before, one map style can't do everything and a
decision to do X will necessarily be at the expense of Y, although
I'd rather it had been more explicitly stated rather more
explicitly. Although
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/CARTOGRAPHY.md">https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/CARTOGRAPHY.md</a>
does say "There are multiple primary purposes of the map style,
which pull in different directions", it doesn't say what trade-offs
are being made and why - but maybe that's not the point of that
document.<br>
<br>
However, if you're now asking about a _different_ rendering, maybe
you need to explain a bit more about what you're proposing? Are you
suggesting an international style available from the osm.org layer
switcher, something maintained by a "GB group" on a separate server,
or something else? Would there be changes to the osm.org website to
allow tiles from it (or another style of the user's choice, such as
the openstreetmap.de one) to be available as a layer?<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Andy<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>