On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 08:14:02PM +0100, Jon Burgess wrote:
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 19:49 +0200, spaetz wrote:
Why should it work differently? If I want a tunnel under a forest, a
layer=-1 *should* draw the tunnel under the forest. Why do you think
it's doing something wrongly?
If the
On Jun 6, 2008, at 09:09, spaetz wrote:
But if you tag a river universally over quite a bit with layer=-1
just for the fun of it, as was in the original example, then this
looks weird. And osmarender is right to make it look weird, isn't it?
I think this can be correct, if say a river
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, spaetz wrote:
Why should it work differently? If I want a tunnel under a forest, a
layer=-1 *should* draw the tunnel under the forest.
It isn't in a tunnel though - if it was, it would have tunnel=yes.
layer=-1 is often used for waterways for a couple of reasons:
1. It
On 2008-06-05, Steve Hill wrote:
Can areas be nested?
Yes, mapped one recently
To a human, it is fairly obvious that a small areas which is completely
enclosed within a larger area should take presidence, but are the
renderers expected to understand this?
I had to add a layer tag to get it
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 12:28 PM, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2008-06-05, Steve Hill wrote:
Can areas be nested?
Yes, mapped one recently
To a human, it is fairly obvious that a small areas which is completely
enclosed within a larger area should take presidence,
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, Dave Stubbs wrote:
If the 2nd area is meant to replace the 1st rather than just say
something extra about the land/water then you should probably make a
hole.
Hmm.. ok. Looks like I need to investigate the multipolygon relations
stuff.
osmarender rules pay attention to
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Dave Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Layer tags on areas are pure evil. The layer tag is there to indicate
vertical separation, not to give a handy z-order hint to the renderer.
So unless you do genuinely have two areas which are physically
suspended one on top
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Martijn van Oosterhout
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Dave Stubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Layer tags on areas are pure evil. The layer tag is there to indicate
vertical separation, not to give a handy z-order hint to the renderer.
So
On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 12:10:23PM +0100, Steve Hill wrote:
As a side note, I noticed that whilst Mapnik appears to be quite good at
rendering areas (e.g. industrial landuse) under the ways, Osmarender
doesn't seem smart enough and areas sometimes obscure ways. For example,
the river is
osmarender rules pay attention to the layer tag even when dealing with
areas. In this case the river is on layer=-1, and the industrial area
has no layer tag (so defaults to 0). osmarender is rendering all -1
objects first, then moves on to the layer 0 objects.
This seems wrong to me.
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 19:49 +0200, spaetz wrote:
osmarender rules pay attention to the layer tag even when dealing with
areas. In this case the river is on layer=-1, and the industrial area
has no layer tag (so defaults to 0). osmarender is rendering all -1
objects first, then moves on
11 matches
Mail list logo
