[OSM-talk] displayed width of roads
S.L.Chilton at mdx.ac.uk
Wed Feb 20 10:53:02 GMT 2008
For mapnik rendering I was thinking of moving tram and light_rail to a
new rendering layer which would be placed just after roads and thus draw
them after roads - which is probably the norm.
Steve Chilton, Learning Support Fellow
Learning and Technical Support Unit Manager
School of Health and Social Sciences
phone/fax: 020 8411 5355
email: steve8 at mdx.ac.uk
Chair of the Society of Cartographers: http://www.soc.org.uk/
SoC conference 2008:
From: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Colin Marquardt
Sent: 19 February 2008 22:00
To: talk at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] displayed width of roads
"Dave Stubbs" <osm.list at randomjunk.co.uk> writes:
> On Feb 18, 2008 11:21 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
>> > > By co-incidence, I was in contact with another mapper who's been
>> > > something like this to make low zoom osmarender rendering a bit
>> > > prettier. What's everybody's opinion of this kind of practice? Is
>> > > not an example of compromising the data (which we want to endure)
>> > > work around a temporary deficiency in one particular renderer?
>> > If the slip roads are not really underneath the other roads then
>> > yes it is definitely wrong (IMHO). The layer tag is meant to
>> > the physical ordering of the roads on the ground.
>> I've had a similar situation on the talk-de list where some people
>> seem to have started adding layer=1 to tram tracks. I don't like this
>> all that much (a bridge leading over a road with tram tracks would
>> then need to be layer=2 etc) but it's hard to argue with them since
>> the tram tracks *are* on top of the road. The layer tag doesn't say
>> how much...
> People take things written down too seriously, I'd argue that if a
> human being can step over it it doesn't count (at a bare minimum).
> I'm sure they think this too but just want tram tracks to appear above
> roads, which is probably a sensible idea, but this isn't the way to go
> about it.
We had discussed this on IRC, and while jburgess and steve8 say it's
possible to modify osm2pgsql/Mapnik to always draw railways on top of
highways (unless the layer tag says otherwise), people had objections
because then some railways close to, but not *in* highways, might
obstruct the highways (and possibly the name), and the highways were
seen as more important.
jburgess says it might be possible to separate out trams and light_rails
from all the other railway tags and only raise these in z-order, but who
knows if this is enough... Another suggestion (from Sfan00) was having
another tag for such "in street" railways.
talk mailing list
talk at openstreetmap.org
More information about the talk