[Tagging] Basic cartography features missing, why?
pla16021 at gmail.com
Mon Nov 9 21:50:49 UTC 2020
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 20:06, stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com> wrote:
> For example, you complain that natural=peninsula doesn't render. So?
> That's not a problem with OSM, it is you assuming that a particular
> renderer is going to display the semiotics you believe it should, when it
> likely does not (exactly as you believe it should). That doesn't mean OSM
> has "basic cartography features missing," it means you are expecting
> something from a particular renderer it likely doesn't perform or deliver
> as you expect.
This is one reason different countries have set up their own renderers
with cartographic styles that align better with the expectations in those
countries. There even seems to be a Swedish version, although
whenever I've tried it over the past few days it times out. See
In principle it would be possible to use that, or even your own private
renderer, to develop a cartographic style that does what you want
(provided the objects you are interested in, such as peninsulas,
exist in the database). If you can achieve something there that the
standard renderer does not offer, you could even submit your
new features to the standard renderer. Some of your changes might
conflict with other goals but, where there are no conflicts, submitting
working code to do X has a far better chance of happening (and happening
relatively quickly) than adding another wish to an already-long list.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging