[OSM-dev] wrong redering of tunnels on the main site after the change of rendering rules

Michael Kugelmann MichaelK_OSM at gmx.de
Tue Oct 15 02:51:30 UTC 2013


On 14.10.2013 10:52, Maarten Deen wrote:
> On 2013-10-14 10:34, Michael Kugelmann wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> while the weekend I stumbled accross the old Elbe tunnel at Hamburg
>> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Pauli-Elbtunnel
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbe_Tunnel_%281911%29
>> and how it is rendered on the main OSM site (mapnik style):
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=53.5439&mlon=9.9665#map=16/53.5439/9.9665 
>>
>> It looks like a road going above the water...   :-(
>>
>> For me the tagging seems to be all right (level, tunnel, etc, all is
>> set) but maybe that the new rendering rules are not correct when the
>> tunnel is below water? Could someone please investigate? Thanks.
>
> What do you expect to see? That the tunnel is not rendered when it is 
> below a waterbody? 
Usually tunnels only have a very blurred/bright color.
Please have a look to a normal tunnel like eg. the Engelbergtunnel:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=48.7933&mlon=9.0237#map=15/48.7933/9.0237
     https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engelbergtunnel
     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engelberg_Tunnel
There the tunnel can hardle be seen on the rendering.
In the case of the Elbe Tunnel (under water) the road has the same (or 
almost the same) color as it would be "above the water". For me this 
really confuses.

> That has never been the case. Tunnels under water have always been 
> rendered the same way they look when under a landmass: lighter in 
> color and dashed lines.
Please compare Engelbergtunnel (landmass) to Elbe-Tunnel. This can't be 
the same. Maybe the additional access control flags on the Elbe Tunnel 
cause the problem, I don't know.

> Compare the Zeeburgertunnel in Amsterdam (natural=coastline):
> <http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=53.5439&mlon=9.9665#map=16/52.3737/4.9748> 
>
> Or the Gouwe-Aquaduct (natural=water)
> <http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=53.5439&mlon=9.9665#map=19/52.02548/4.66688> 
>
both are fine but could be even a litte more bright (IMHO).
But if you compare these two against the Elbe-Tunnel you can see that 
the Elbe tunnel is not at all that bright and "hidden".


Best regars,
Michael.




More information about the dev mailing list