[OSM-talk] fences, trees and houses

Christian Quest cquest at openstreetmap.fr
Wed Nov 21 09:01:35 GMT 2012


It's a rendering matter... looking a bit "flashy" with pink in private
alleys and green dots for trees.

Switch to MapQuest layer, you'll have another less flashy render:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.91503&lon=174.77973&zoom=16&layers=<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.91503&lon=174.77973&zoom=16&layers=M>
Q


2012/11/21 Greg Troxel <gdt at ir.bbn.com>

>
> Robin Paulson <robin at bumblepuppy.org> writes:
>
> > i've done some quite detailed editing near where i live, i'd
> > appreciate anyone who is interested taking a look and responding.
> >
> > i'm not sure what to make of the result. for one, my partner, a
> > non-mapper, has told me she finds it very confusing, which potentially
> > raises questions
> >
> >
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.91503&lon=174.77973&zoom=16&layers=M
>
> I think it's important to separate what should be in the database vs
> what should be rendered.
>
> I find the rendering symbol for access=private ways to be unpleasing,
> because they have more visual weight than accessible ways.  I'd rather
> see them kind of greyed out.  I also think the 'access denied' coloring
> is in appropriate for ways that people wouldn't expect to be able to
> use, as opposed to ways where such rendering (to make the tagging known)
> has more communicative value.  As always, I like to go back to the USGS
> topo maps; there driveways are thin lines without any 'danger stay out'
> hints.
>
> The fences are confusing because people are used to seeing lot lines,
> and fences look almost like lot lines, but not quite.  And because
> fences look like lines that perhaps driveways should look like.  Again,
> a rendering issue as the default style is extended to show more
> elements, and I think it really points out that one size fits all for
> rendering can't be pleasing to everyone.
>
> I'm not sure what I think of the tree dots.  Again going back to USGS
> topo maps, I find it nice to know wooded (green tint) vs open (white
> background) areas.  This has to me far more information transfer than
> tree dots.  But I think it's good that the trees are in the db.
>
> Finally, I get the impression (didn't look at imagery) that buildings
> are less complete than fences.  That may contribute to the confusion.
>
> As a rendering nit, I find that the no-acess tint on the driveways
> extends into the middle of the navigable road, and that feels wrong, but
> I don't know how hard it is to fix.
>
> I would encourage you to set up your own rendering stack and play with
> alternatives.   I haven't done that, but it's on my todo list.
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>


-- 
Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France -
http://openstreetmap.fr/u/cquest<http://openstreetmap.fr/u/christian-quest>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20121121/eacd03b2/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list