frederik at remote.org
Fri Mar 16 15:54:26 GMT 2007
> As you'll see on the page, I am not proposing this is a single node
> in the junction, but a single node
> introduced near the junction which serves as a label.
I think label nodes are evil. They cannot be automatically brought
into context with anything. The renderer can take it or leave it, but
not move it to e.g. the other side of the junction where it would fit
better (assuming we had renderers that clever, which ATM we haven't).
Label nodes are mixing two different things. They are _meant_ to
control rendering, but they are _introduced_ to the data layer, where
they sit around unconnected to the data they describe (only connected
by proximity which is a very relative thing - I could always zoom
into a junction so far that I the label is screens away).
I agree that this would be a quick fix to achieve prettier maps, but
still I'll vote against. It is just not right, from a technical
perspective. I'd rather live with un-named junctions until we find a
better way. (For example, I would also want potential routing
applications to tell the driver "you are approaching Cat's Behind
Junction", which I cannot really do if I had to guess the junction
name from nodes lying around in the vicinity!)
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00.09' E008°23.33'
More information about the talk