Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-18 Thread Dave F.
On 18/09/2014 19:51, colliar wrote: Am 18.09.2014 00:18, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: Il giorno 17/set/2014, alle ore 22:32, "Dave F." ha scritto: As an example: If it has a name you'd have two objects of that name, when in fact there's only one. If someone wanted to find out how many name

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-18 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
> Il giorno 18/set/2014, alle ore 20:51, colliar ha > scritto: > > No, the name problem is simply solved with a multipolygon or site > relation if needed. This way we still have one single object. yes one object, but arguably a wrong one, because the name should in many cases comprise the h

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-18 Thread colliar
Am 18.09.2014 00:18, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > > >> Il giorno 17/set/2014, alle ore 22:32, "Dave F." ha >> scritto: >> >> As an example: If it has a name you'd have two objects of that name, when in >> fact there's only one. If someone wanted to find out how many named wood >> there are

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-17 Thread Paul Norman
On 9/17/2014 7:33 AM, Dave F. wrote: I wouldn't describe size based ordering as 'well defined'. The polygon table has no column or combination of columns which is guaranteed to be unique. We only need to have a well defined ordering within a meta-tile that is consistent across boundaries, not g

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-17 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
> Il giorno 17/set/2014, alle ore 22:32, "Dave F." ha > scritto: > > As an example: If it has a name you'd have two objects of that name, when in > fact there's only one. If someone wanted to find out how many named wood > there are in a city it would return inaccurate data. I agree with t

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-17 Thread Dave F.
On 17/09/2014 13:04, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2014-09-17 10:43 GMT+02:00 Dave F. >: On 16/09/2014 14:59, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2014-09-16 15:32 GMT+02:00 Dave F. mailto:dave...@madasafish.com>>: I find it surprising something as arbitra

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-17 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-09-17 16:33 GMT+02:00 Dave F. : > but I can point to cases where parks should be on top of trees. > > > Please do, I'd be interested to see them. I agree that trees should probably always render above parks, especially if the park area is opaque and obfuscating the trees. If the park would

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-17 Thread Dave F.
On 16/09/2014 19:55, Paul Norman wrote: On Sep 16, 2014, at 06:33 AM, "Dave F." wrote: On 16/09/2014 13:41, Matthijs Melissen wrote: > In general, we render smaller landuse on top of larger landuse. I find it surprising something as arbitrary as size is used as the defining factor. Com

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-17 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-09-17 10:43 GMT+02:00 Dave F. : > On 16/09/2014 14:59, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > 2014-09-16 15:32 GMT+02:00 Dave F. : > >> I find it surprising something as arbitrary as size is used as the >> defining factor. Comparing actual tags would surely make more sense. >> > > > well, size sur

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-17 Thread Dave F.
On 16/09/2014 14:59, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2014-09-16 15:32 GMT+02:00 Dave F. >: I find it surprising something as arbitrary as size is used as the defining factor. Comparing actual tags would surely make more sense. well, size surely has some cor

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-16 Thread Paul Norman
On Sep 16, 2014, at 06:33 AM, "Dave F." wrote: On 16/09/2014 13:41, Matthijs Melissen wrote:        > In general, we render smaller landuse on top of larger landuse. I find it surprising something as arbitrary as size is used as the defining factor. Comparing actual tags would surely make more

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-16 Thread colliar
Am 16.09.2014 15:59, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:> > 2014-09-16 15:32 GMT+02:00 Dave F. >: > > I find it surprising something as arbitrary as size is used as the > defining factor. Comparing actual tags would surely make more sense. > > > > well, size surely

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-16 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-09-16 15:32 GMT+02:00 Dave F. : > I find it surprising something as arbitrary as size is used as the > defining factor. Comparing actual tags would surely make more sense. > well, size surely has some correlation with importance. For practical reasons it is generally working quite well to h

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-16 Thread Dave F.
On 16/09/2014 13:41, Matthijs Melissen wrote: In general, we render smaller landuse on top of larger landuse. I find it surprising something as arbitrary as size is used as the defining factor. Comparing actual tags would surely make more sense. That gives sometimes unexpected results if two

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-16 Thread Janko Mihelić
Ideally we could render little trees on top of the park. Janko 2014-09-16 14:41 GMT+02:00 Matthijs Melissen : > On 16 September 2014 11:25, Dave F. wrote: > > I've mapped an area where a woodland overlaps with a park: > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.48959/-2.52536 > > > > The new ma

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-16 Thread Matthijs Melissen
On 16 September 2014 11:25, Dave F. wrote: > I've mapped an area where a woodland overlaps with a park: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.48959/-2.52536 > > The new mapnik rendering doesn't display it. > Here's a comparison with old & new: > http://bl.ocks.org/tyrasd/raw/6164696/#16.00/51.

Re: [OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-16 Thread Janko Mihelić
This is the place for Standard layer issues: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues I searched a bit and I didn't find the issue with parks. Try searching yourself, maybe I just didn't find it. Janko 2014-09-16 12:25 GMT+02:00 Dave F. : > Hi > I've mapped an area where a wo

[OSM-talk] Wood & Park mapnik carto anomaly?

2014-09-16 Thread Dave F.
Hi I've mapped an area where a woodland overlaps with a park: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.48959/-2.52536 The new mapnik rendering doesn't display it. Here's a comparison with old & new: http://bl.ocks.org/tyrasd/raw/6164696/#16.00/51.4890/-2.5267 You'll also notice it previous render

[OSM-talk] *=wood

2009-04-11 Thread Simon Ward
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 07:59:48AM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote: > > Hold on there. Defined? defined by whom. If you mean its in map features > > then that's cool because I put them there :-D > > On the other hand Map Features isn't a rule book or a prescribed standard. > > Its guidance on how you m