[OSM-talk] Combined bicycle & footway

[Richard Mann]

I suspect the people who do the rendering rather assume that 99%+ of
the time, bicycle=yes/designated coincides with foot=yes/designated
(either on that way or one so immediately adjacent that you couldn't
draw them separately). So there's no distinction to be made, and
blue=both.

If you want to make fancy distinctions, render it yourself (try Maperitive)

Richard

On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 4:25 PM, john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com> wrote:
> There are many different ways to render cycle and footpaths and a number of
> different ways to indicate them as well.  You can create your own custom
> rendering rules but in view of all the differences floating around I suspect
> the defaults work fine for most people.
>
> For example locally we have mutil use paths some are tagged cycle some are
> not, we have paved shoulders that are used for snow in winter and cycles in
> summer, they don't show on the default mapnik rendering.  The latest I've
> heard of is sharrow markings which are being used locally again not rendered
> by default.
>
> Cheerio John
>
> On 20 August 2011 10:49, Tomas Straupis <tomasstraupis at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>>  Currently combined bicycle & footway
>> (highway=path/foot=designated/bicycle=designated) is rendered in
>> mapnik as a simple cycleway (blue dotted line).
>>
>>  Is there a reason for this or simply nobody has fixed that in mapnik
>> stylesheet (currently bicycle blue is rendered on top of footway red
>> making red part invisible)?
>>
>>  I've seen this one:
>>  http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/2425
>>  but the reasoning "blue dots are on anything you can ride a bicycle"
>> is not convincing... You can ride on track, on residential and yet
>> it's not blue dots... I would like such combined ways to indicate that
>> they are created for BOTH cyclists and walkers (especially then this
>> would include segregated ones).
>>
>>  I could send a working mapnik0.7 fix for that... (rendering it as
>> blue-red-blue-red dots.)
>>
>> P.S. Sorry if this is not an appropriate list for this (there is no
>> such list as "osm-mapnik" or similar).
>>
>> --
>> Tomas Straupis
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> talk at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>