[Talk-us] renderer adaptation (was: Unpaved streets )

[Paul Fox]

chris wrote:
 > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Alex Mauer <hawke at hawkesnest.net> wrote:
 > 
 > > On 09/09/2009 12:05 PM, Chris Hunter wrote:
 > > > ....  Of course, it also reopens the track/path argument,
 > > > but I'll leave that to others to battle out.
 > >
 > > How is there even an argument there?  track is for cars and always has
 > > been, while path is for not-cars and always has been.
 > >
 > > There's an ongoing thread on the newbies list about tracks and paths not
 > rendering in the cyclemap layer.  It's basically a rehash of the "code for
 > accuracy, not for the renderer".  The start of the thread is at
 > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/newbies/2009-September/003522.html

how hard is it (either technically or "politically") to get the
major renderers to adapt to needs like this?  as i understand it,
the paved/unpaved topic has much the same issue.  (and i'd like
to be able to tell my new-to-osm friends that they'll someday be
able to actually see the results of adding unpaved tags.)

paul
=---------------------
 paul fox, pgf at foxharp.boston.ma.us (arlington, ma, where it's 55.4 degrees)