[OSM-talk] Cycle route planning using OSM

[Andy Robinson]

Andrew Rowbottom wrote:
>Sent: 27 April 2007 11:18 AM
>To: talk at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: [OSM-talk] Cycle route planning using OSM
>
>>> Is an additional way the best option here? To capture both
>contra-flow lanes and lanes on only one side we could use:
>
>>> Separate ways would seem to be more appropriate for paths that are
>set away from the road.
>
>>How do we want this rendered?
>>Would it look better to have a cycleway rendered as a separate way along
>side the highway?
>
>This touches on a minor problem I have - near me there's a bridleway
>that runs alongside the trunk road in a slight dip, separated by a
>verge and wall. In the T at H renderer you can't see the bridleway at all
>- it's obscured by the main road. Should the renderers be made more
>clever or should I use layer?
>

This problem occurs by default on both mapnik and osmarender. There is an
argument for having slightly different render versions for all the main
modes of transport. At the moment all the rendering is road biased but there
is no reason not to make alternative versions available for selection which
bias cycling or footpaths.

Cheers

Andy

Andy Robinson
Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk 


>Andrew Rowbottom
>
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>talk at openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk