On 9 July 2014 20:44, Daniel Koć dan...@xn--ko-wla.pl wrote:
I have no preference which general map should be default - the beauty one
or the working one - but two beauty maps and no working one makes no
sense to me.
I remember having seem an adaptation of the Mapnik style, but with
extra tags
W dniu 09.07.2014 19:08, SomeoneElse napisał(a):
Historically, the standard style was a for mappers style - it was
designed to show features that mappers had mapped. That has been
changing (largely without community involvement or review). I tried
That is exactly what I would expect! There
MapQuest Open is the only map style I never truly understood - it's a
general purpose map, while others have their purpose stated clear in the
name. What were the reason behind taking it on board, does anybody know?
MapQuest matches the prerequisites to be a feature tile on OSM homepage [1].
W dniu 09.07.2014 22:03, John Packer napisał(a):
MapQuest matches the prerequisites to be a feature tile on OSM
homepage [1].
OpenSeaMap matches them even better, so it's still not clear to me why
MQ was selected and OSeaM was not.
A similar discussion recently started on the _talk_
I think the problem with Openseamap is that they have two layers of tiles,
one standard layer which they take from openstreetmap servers:
http://b.tile.openstreetmap.org/15/17484/10492.png
and one over it, with all the symbols:
http://tiles.openseamap.org/seamark/15/17484/10492.png
2014-07-09
