[OSM-talk] Osmarender4 slippy map (preview)

[David Earl]

Fred said:
> @David, I like your additions but I'd rather not force them upon
> everyone "through the back door" at this time - I think the planned
> Cartography Meetup should pose an excellent opportunity for people to
> decide what they want on the maps and how (or at least to decide upon a
> process that leads to decisions... ;-). The tiles affected can, once
> people decide what they want and how, easily be found out from the
> planet file and then re-rendered at any time.

I appreciate you may not want to add them immediately, but I thought we had
a process for voting on these things. Schools have been in there for ages.
Universities, windmills and some others were added in January (memo: I must
move these approved features to the Map Features page - but someone recently
said they were reorganising that page).

I have to say, a map of Cambridge which doesn't have the University colleges
on it is a very poor map; and we render e.g. retail landuse, while landuse
for schools is a far higher proportion of land - while mapping I was amazed
by how much space is allocated to schools and their playing fields in
Cambridge.

Yet insignificant features like post boxes are there very prominently (and
confused with post offices, as several people have said), but phone boxes
are not. And why names of pubs but not names of churches? Why pubs at all,
and not schools, except that no one;s got round to doing them until now?

Bridges and mini roundabouts (but not traffic signals) seem to have been
added "through the back door". I think these are an excellent innovations,
but haven't gone through an approval meeting AFAIK.

And it now appears this "Cartography Meetup" is for a very small number of
people.

If others have marked schools (particularly), and traffic signals, etc. etc.
as per the Map features page, I'd have thought a very large number of tiles
would be affected.

David