[OSM-talk] odd rendering + county boundaries

[Steve Chilton]

As Jon says we are on the case, but it is not simple.
BTW not done deliberately, more a result of counties/countries being put in relations and then picking up styling by default that was designed with some other instance in mind. This is equally true of rendering names along boundaries which was not designed for, but is an artefact of the same process.
 
Cheers
STEVE(8)

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Jon Burgess [mailto:jburgess777 at googlemail.com] 
	Sent: Mon 3/2/2009 7:00 PM 
	To: kevin at kevinpeat.com 
	Cc: Thomas Wood; OSM Talk; Steve Chilton 
	Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] odd rendering + county boundaries
	
	

	On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 13:00 +0000, Kevin Peat wrote:
	>
	> It's two things....the county boundary shouldn't go up rivers in the
	> first place but also the part of the boundary that follows the coast
	> would be better not being rendered. It seems to me that it must be
	> included in a relation so that the county is an area but would be
	> better
	> not being visible.
	>
	> Kevin
	
	I discussed this with Steve8 a few days ago on IRC and the plan is to:
	
	- Hide any boundary rendering on ways with natural=coastline
	
	- When there is more than one boundary on a given way, only render the
	one with the lowest admin_level. This corresponds to the most important
	boundary.
	
	It is complicated by the fact that the information has to be
	cross-referenced across multiple objects. This will need some extra
	processing in osm2pgsql to implement and it may be a few weeks before I
	get around to it.
	
	        Jon