[OSM-talk] Osmarender based slippy map

[80n]

On 11/23/06, Dave <osm.list at randomjunk.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I think mapnik is probably the way forward: the osmarender stuff can look
> pretty rubbish when you get in close,


That might be down to the svg->png processor.  When I use Adobe or Inkscape
I get much better looking results at large scale than you seem to have got.

 80n

especially if you try to render street names, although plenty of tweaking
> would probably make it better. I just like the zoomed out "coverage" type
> map rather than the actually useful feature map that the new slippy map is
> producing. I'd have maybe used mapnik to make this but it would have
> involved installing postgres and I couldn't be bothered ;-)
>
> Anyway, assuming infinite amounts of tile storage capacity, there's
> nothing to stop you using both types on the map as different layers, and
> letting the user decide which one they want to see. Afterall, there's /only/
> 3.4GB of tiles there :-)
>
>
> On 11/23/06, Andy Robinson <Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Pretty neat that Dave. So I hope we are not going to have render wars
> > next
> > :-)
> >
> > In the longer run perhaps renderers can share a common data and delivery
> > format structure which will then just leave the look and feel and the
> > extent
> > of displayed objects down to the individual. Either that or these
> > options
> > will be selectable by the user from a single map rendering facility so
> > that
> > tailored and unique maps can be created on the fly.
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20061123/a70357a6/attachment.html>