[OSM-talk] Parking symbols: YUCK!

[Lester Caine]

J.D. Schmidt wrote:
> Tom Hughes skrev:
>> In message <47C0892E.10708 at frankieandshadow.com>
>>           David Earl <david at frankieandshadow.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 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.
>> I believe it will - as far as I know mapnik has rendered those
>> symbols for parking areas for some time.
>>
>>> 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.
>> I believe it is fundamentally wrong to add nodes which duplicate
>> areas, although I know it is quite common.
> 
> Let me just remind you all, that there are no "rules". There are only 
> recommendations. When you all come to realize that, you will find that 
> it is not a question of whether someone has put a node within an area in 
> the database, but a question of whether the rendering engine in question 
> can figure out not to render the node if it has the same icon as an 
> renderengine-placed icon for the area containing that node.

The underlying problem is that the 'recommendations' keep changing. A node to 
allow a 'P' to appear WAS used when there was nothing to produce one 
otherwise. NOW that areas are ( in some cases ) being rendered and annotated 
the additional nodes may well be unnecessary.

The real problem here is that CHANGES to the recommendations are not being 
followed through with recommendations to remove the original version. BUT as 
has been pointed out - the renderers follow their own interpretation of the 
recommendations, so at present one has to decide WHICH renderer you are adding 
data for :(

*SO* perhaps there should be some RULES that at least provide some consistency 
in how things are being added. And perhaps in 10 years time someone may get 
around to considering how areas SHOULD be used?

We need ONE set of rendering rules that will produce consistent results and 
when a rendering engine is NOT following the rules there should be a decision 
either to add the rule consistently, or remove it. A SWITCH for 'consistent' 
rendering which can be disabled on local versions were people are not bothered 
about consistency?

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk
MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php