[OSM-talk] osmarender and mappaint styles

David Groom reviews at pacific-rim.net
Fri Oct 20 11:30:37 BST 2006


blank
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Earl" <david at frankieandshadow.com>
To: "OSM" <talk at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 10:06 AM
Subject: [OSM-talk] osmarender and mappaint styles


> Having realised the advantages of landuse and other area properties now I
> know how to use them, I've been doing more with them.
>
> However, I've realised the osmarender styles aren't complete (e.g.
> landuse=allotments, military=range don't render among many others, and 
> names
> don't get rendered for parks etc, even if I use a tagged node inside the
> area). I know I can add these (and have). But it seems a waste of effort 
> for
> me to do this just for me. If I was to go through the list and add them
> systematically (colours for missing area types, icons for missing node
> types), would this be helpful and can I get it into the osmarender 
> release?
> I can prepare a document proposing what colours and icons to use first if
> you like.


As far as symbosl for Osmarender goes you can always add them to:
 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/SVG_Symbols

that way they:

a) might be picked up for future releases of Osmarender
b) allow users to insert them in the current version of Osmarender

David

>
> Secondly, I think it would be better if the mappaint plugin defalts had
> colours consistent with osmarender (e.g. cycleways are rendered in magenta
> in mappaint and green in osmarender, while footways are green vs brown).
> Again I know (and have) changed these, but I would have thought most 
> people
> would want this. mappaint also has a different set of missing area
> renderings (mostly more of them). Again, would it be helpful for me to
> systematically bring these into line? (Note for the future: wouldn't it be
> even better if they used the same style file?)
>
> Personally, I've also found it much more helpful to set mappaint render 
> the
> ways wider than the default (river is especially narrow by default, but 
> all
> roads), because it is easier to then see the difference between segments 
> and
> ways, and see what's missing, especially for dark colours (I'm workng on a
> white background, which I find much more comfortable). What do other 
> people
> think about this?
>
> Finally, mappaint apparently renders objects in order, so that coloured
> areas (e.g. a park) obscure linear ways (e.g. a cycleway through the park)
> that happen to be rendered first. osmarender does things in a better order
> so ways overlay areas. Could whoever needs to know, consider this for some
> attention in the mappaint plugin (or would it be in the main JOSM?)
>
> David
>
> PS I've put an example JOSM screenshot at
> http://www.frankieandshadow.com/xref/jsom-example.jpg which shows:
> - allotments rendered in brown (added)
> - park obscuring way (you can see the nodes)
> - parking area not rendered (but node is)
> - thick line for railway, thicker than default for residential, cycleway
> etc.
> etc.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
> 







More information about the talk mailing list