[OSM-talk] Large Rivers in general, mapnik rendering in Particular
David Groom
reviews at pacific-rim.net
Fri Feb 8 11:54:29 GMT 2008
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Earl" <david at frankieandshadow.com>
To: "Artem Pavlenko" <artem.mapnik at googlemail.com>
Cc: "David Groom" <reviews at pacific-rim.net>; <talk at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 11:27 AM
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Large Rivers in general, mapnik rendering in
Particular
> You could do it as a relation.
>
> The river bank would be a set of ways (each of which shares its end nodes
> with the ends of one of the others), and you could have a role for the one
> or two ways which close the loop which says "this is structural, not
> really part of the river bank". The renderer would have to assemble the
> polygon from the constituent ways (start with one way, find the end node
> as the start node of another way and so on), but then rendering would be
> as per any other polygon.
>
> It's a bit fiddly, but it removes the problems of the
> artificial connections across the water not eing idetifiable while at the
> same time still providing a complete polygon (albeit indirectly) for the
> renderer to work on.
>
You mean like
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Relations/Proposed/Rivers, which
would be my ideal, but I'm just not sure Mapnik and Tiles at home, mkgmap, and
Kosmos, etc .... would be able to deal with these.
I guess it comes down to two conflicting opinions:
1) are we tagging to match as near as possible what is the real position on
the ground, and the renders then have to deal with this; or
2) should our tagging structure make it as easy as possible for the
renderers
> David
>
More information about the talk
mailing list