[OSM-talk] Osmarender4 slippy map (preview)

[80n]

On 2/11/07, Jochen Topf <jochen at remote.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 09:09:11AM +0000, 80n wrote:
> > >@Steve, I spoke to Jochen about the abutters thing and he said he
> > >*thought* not to have touched them but I confirm what you are seeing.
> > >But the abutters are (Jochen's words) a dark and murky area of
> > >Osmarender, so let's just postpone this.
> >
> >
> > Not so.  There is nothing special or different about abutters as far as
> > Osmarender is concerned.  They are just a style controlled by a rule,
> just
> > like everything else.  I would prefer it people started to use landuse
> tags
> > in place of abutters though.  The results are much nicer and the
> precision
> > much greater with landuse.  Abutters were just a crude way of doing
> shading
> > in the days before we had areas.
>
> Frederik wasn't quoting me correctly. The dark and murkey area I was
> refering to was the butt-end vs. round-end stuff. This really concerns
> all line features, not only abutters. Steves remark was about
> butt-end/round-end stuff for abutters, so thats where the confusion comes
> from.


That makes much more sense - the method for making square end roads is
pretty messy...


And I very much agree that we should move to landuse instead of
> abutters, but as long as it is so hard to have multiple ways on the same
> nodes thats probably not going to happen.


The solution to that is to use seperate ways with their own nodes running in
parallel.  Not ideal, but it is still a much better solution than abutters.



Jochen
> --
> Jochen Topf  jochen at remote.org  http://www.remote.org/jochen/
>   +49-721-388298
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20070211/278b6444/attachment.html>