[Tagging] Fwd: Door to door routing to buildings with multiple occupants

Peter Wendorff wendorff at uni-paderborn.de
Wed Dec 5 04:56:01 GMT 2012


Am 04.12.2012 22:27, schrieb Markus Lindholm:
> On 4 December 2012 17:44, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com 
> <mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     2012/12/4 Markus Lindholm <markus.lindholm at gmail.com
>     <mailto:markus.lindholm at gmail.com>>:
>     >> > it would make it impossible to render addresses and POIs at
>     the same
>     >> > time.
>     >> this depends entirely on your rendering rules.
>     > How would you devise a rendering rule that makes an intelligible
>     map with
>     > two icons mapped on top of each other on the same spot?
>
>
>     why should the address be an icon?
>
>
> I include numerical digits in the concept of an icon. So to reiterate, 
> your scheme makes it impossible to render addresses and POIs at the 
> same time.
Why?
Yes, there are two "conflicting" information packets on the same spot, 
one is the address and one is the POI that could be rendered e.g. as a 
shop. But it's up to the rendering rules how to deal with that.
Using a distinct address node currently leads to arbitrary random 
decisions which element to draw on the map due to space collision 
detection. Having both in one icon could (but is not currently) be used 
to define rules about how to draw a shop that has an address - e.g. by 
slightly moving the house number to the bottom of the icon, or by 
rendering the housenumber on top of the icon willingly (might depend on 
the icon).

I don't see why that's more a problem in one node than in different ones 
- except that the current rendering rules don't fit here. In that your 
argumentation sounds much like a tagging-for-the-renderer-argumentation.

regards
Peter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20121205/7988875f/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list