[OSM-talk] Problems with Osmarender

[Ben Robbins]

I've been busy removing all the capital letters, and making ways, and i have 
got an area round me rendered off succsefully. its very much W.I.P, and 
paths end randomly at the second.  I have a few problems and a few 
observations though.   I not very good at keepin up with the mailing lists 
cause they drive me nuts, so if this has been discussed and resolved before 
could I have a link (or if there is a wiki page on the matter).

current render: 
http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g226/ben_robbins_/SouthNorthants001.png

(Render Area = min lat:52.066378479668366 min lon:1.1123367258727554 max 
lat:52.15469186349886 max lon:0.9464273343426719)

Problems...

1)  The woods...the green area renders very strangly on the larger areas.
2)  (hard to make out from render)  A small peice of the trunk road west of 
towcester seems to have a gap in it where the layby is.  Im not shore why 
its doing this.
3) My dismantled railway seems not to be visable (railway=abandoned)
4) How can I make a secondary road residential? Or an A road for that 
matter..(e.g. whittlebury)
5) My rivers sit behind the woods in places, I need to make them visible

obserations...

1) The colour of bridleways is very similar to woods, and they cant be seen 
over the woods.  Footways are relitvely hard to make out also.
2) The look of paths and tracks from a distance looks the same.  Personally 
i think tracks should be the same as roads, with a lighter border line
3) leading on from 2... I said this in email a few days ago, but i really 
really supermegareally think there needs to be different track types.  I'll 
make a proposal on the proposed tags bit, unless theres a good reason why 
not to.  But I think the more majour the track the darker the outline, until 
black becomes a unclassified road.  there are 5 different sorts of track 
type that I see regually.
4) I think this image indicates the need for water=stream and 
water=dry_stream (or something similar)...cause my streams are way way 
bigger than they are in reality.
5)Places that arnt highway=residential that are in the middle of towns are 
current just left as highway=unclassified.  Is there nothing for populated 
areas wich is the business area?  highway=buiness for example?

In a reply from andy (I think), it said that the current way in wich taging 
was done was limited to just specifying the overall feature of a way.  
Rather than being able to stick down its phisical, political and used 
statuses seperately and render them seperately.   Well would it not be 
easier to make different render colours for the various combinations, so 
that I could put ''highway=track_grade5_bridleway'' for example, and then 
''highway=track_grade1_footway'' somewhere else.  there would be quite a few 
combinations to define though.

Finally...I'm still so insainly confused as to why ways are being used.  
When i scan down the features list and imagin a 'complete' highstreet, I can 
only imagin a street made up of hundreds and hundreds of tiny ways, each  
being 1 segment long.  I'm shore i'm missing something here.

I don't wish to sound like im getting frustrated or anything.  In fact today 
has been awesum.. Its the first time Ive actually rendered a map, and its 
sweet as hell.

Oh yeah...finally finally.... There is a page on the wiki where OS faults 
can be put, but i havnt put any, cause there are just soooo many round me.  
There are many many missing lakes, paths in the wrong spots/wrong sides of 
buiuldings, missing cops/woods, misshaped woods, woodland trails that are 
missing/wrong/insianly worng, misasing tracks, tracks that arnt where the 
map says, missing sections of tracks...etcetc... Im not shore how much is 
intentional, but I don't think its worth sticking every mistake into the 
wiki, so I'll just point it out in here, that OS got south-Northants wrong 
in gerneral, or so it would seem.

Right I'm Done...
Thanks
Ben