[OSM-talk] Parking symbols: YUCK!

[Andy Robinson]

On 23/02/2008, David Earl <david at frankieandshadow.com> wrote:
> I see that someone has gone ahead and put automatic parking symbols at
>  the middle of amenity=parking areas in osmarender. This means nearly all
>  parking is getting two symbols now and it looks AWFUL. (The good news,
>  though is that the symbol is nearly always close to where I chose to put
>  a node manually).
>
>  Unfortunately removing the related node isn't going to work, because
>  Mapnik won't then render parking symbols. And it is a lot of work to do
>  that.
>
>  And by the way, even if Mapnik does eventually do this, don't be tempted
>  to remove P nodes automatically, as some of them have names. The names
>  would need to be transferred to the area, with all the issues of
>  conflicts that might throw up.
>
>  Since we have contradictory behaviour in the two renderers we can't
>  resolve this automatically unless osmarender can look and see on the fly
>  if there is a P node inside the area it is trying to do one for
>  automatically.
>
>  In the meantime, I think osmarender should only do this if there is a
>  tag on the area (eg osmarender:symbol=yes).
>
If I create a parking area I really don't want to have to place a node
as well so it would be better if the renderer's were clever and
ignored any node thats within the area where it has the same tags (eg
parking / name). If I'm mapping properly and systematically I tend to
draw in the parking area but if I'm just noting parking then its a
node so at different times both get used and thus both should be
rendered appropriately. If I do create an area I then obviously remove
the node, transferring ant tags to the area if required.

The same arguments apply to most areas. I have similar issues with
schools for instance where the school icon is rendered for a node but
not for an area.

We ought to try and keep consistency.

Cheers

Andy
-- 
Andy Robinson