[OSM-dev] MAPNIK - proposal to drop rendering of underground railway lines

Artem Pavlenko artem at mapnik.org
Thu May 17 19:17:58 BST 2007


On 17 May 2007, at 18:22, Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Peter Pearson wrote:
>> ----- Original Message ----
>>
>> From: Nick Black <nickblack1 at gmail.com>
>>
>> To: Andy Allan <gravitystorm at gmail.com>
>>
>> Cc: Dev Openstreetmap <dev at openstreetmap.org>
>>
>> Sent: Wednesday, 16 May, 2007 6:03:56 PM
>>
>> Subject: Re: [OSM-dev] MAPNIK - proposal to drop rendering of  
>> underground railway lines
>>
>>
>>
>>> But what functionality does it add to the map?
>>
>> As others have said, it's useful.
>>
>> I find this hideously useful:
>>
>> http://tubejp.co.uk/
>
> Yes! That is exactly the kind of overlay I was thinking of. If we can
> make an overlay like that, it would be really cool. But it's  
> irrelevant
> to the matter at hand, which is what happens when that overlay is off.


Yes, I like this idea (overlaying london tube on top of the map). But  
we need better data, not just straight segments, IMHO.
Cheers,
Artem

>
> IMHO all subway lines that are under the ground must disappear, and  
> all
> railways that are not under the ground must stay visible as  
> landmarks to
> navigate by (weather they are part of subway networks or not). Main  
> line
> railways that are passing through a tunnel through a mountain or
> something in the countryside could be shown dotted, but if they are
> passing under a city (like thameslink), then they should be hidden,  
> the
> same as subways, unless the subway overlay layer is switched on.
>
>
> See for example West Acton station in that tubejp site. The line is
> visible in the normal map because it is above ground, but the overlay
> tells you what colour it is.
>
> I still think the problem is that it isn't clear if railway=subway
> implies that it is under the ground or not - we need to distinguish
> railways that are part of subway networks from railways that are under
> the ground. The two properties are independent of each other.
>
> Robert (Jamie) Munro
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFGTI9Rz+aYVHdncI0RAnsUAJ4zmY+RPajA9lwlb7gOJzu2KVh3JACgugvF
> DNsDOOWb3nxpU+u7+h8S+lA=
> =psLU
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev mailing list
> dev at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>

Artem Pavlenko
http://mapnik.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/attachments/20070517/490fd0c0/attachment.html>


More information about the dev mailing list