Hi all
As far as I can tell neither the mapnik nor the osmarender basemap
displays surface information/modifiers (ie. if a tag like
surface=unpaved or similar is present). Now I can definitely see how
this is not an issue in large parts of the world, urban roads just being
paved (as they are
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Asztalos Attila
wrote:
> As far as I can tell neither the mapnik nor the osmarender basemap displays
> surface information/modifiers (ie. if a tag like surface=unpaved or similar
> is present).
Is it public access, or is it owned privately? I ask because there is
On 11-Jan-2011 15:51, Richard Mann wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Asztalos Attila
wrote:
As far as I can tell neither the mapnik nor the osmarender basemap displays
surface information/modifiers (ie. if a tag like surface=unpaved or similar
is present).
Is it public access, or is it
On 11 January 2011 23:51, Richard Mann
wrote:
> Is it public access, or is it owned privately? I ask because there is
> a strong correlation between public roads and decent maintenance where
> I come from. And as it happens, Mapnik does show access=private.
>
> (the general problem with rendering
2011/1/11 John Smith :
> There is a lot of public unsurfaced roads in Australia, some are
> graveled, some are black soil and you don't both using them in the wet
> without a 4wd etc.
>
> These usually show on maps as dashed lines, rather than solid lines,
> rather than messing with the colour.
y
Asztalos Attila wrote:
> On 11-Jan-2011 15:51, Richard Mann wrote:
>> Which is not to say that knowing which roads are cobbled
>> wouldn't be handy sometimes (but I probably think of this
>> as something you need to render for yourself (cue ad for
>> Maperitive...))
>
> I certainly see the meri
On 12 January 2011 03:04, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> yes, I agree that it would be nice to have a different rendering for
> roads based on their surface. This is not completely trivial though:
> there is also another tag regarding the surface: smoothness. Somehow
Except you could quite easily t
This convention of using a dotted line to indicate an unsurfaced road is also
standard practice in the USA.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] surface=unpaved
>From :mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
Date :Tue Jan 11 10:40:49 America/Chicago 2011
On 11 January 2011 23
vertical
sides). This can happen to any roadway, regardless of how it is surfaced.
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] surface=unpaved
From :mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
Date :Tue Jan 11 11:08:22 America/Chicago 2011
On 12 January 2011 03:04, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote
On 12 January 2011 03:25, wrote:
> Is there a tag for marking a section of road as deteriorated, rutted or
> washed out? There needs to be a range of values, as the severity can range
> from merely requiring you to slow down, to rendering the road completely
> impassable (as when a flood resu
On 11 January 2011 17:06, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Try playing with Maperitive, or Osmarender, or Mapnik, or Halcyon, or
> whatever, to have a go at rendering it yourself. Keep playing until you've
> got something that looks simple, intuitive and neat. When you've got this
> really great renderi
On 11/01/2011 17:57, DavidD wrote:
The mapnik layer already renders highway=track;surfaced=paved as a
solid line and highway=track;surface=unpaved as a dashed line.
An example
http://osm.org/go/eutNf8ah--
That is rendering the different tracktype tags (grade1/grade2 etc), not
the surface tag
> http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/floodrelief/gallery-fn7ik2te-1225983067381?page=90
Here's another example:
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/floodrelief/gallery-fn7ik2te-1225983067381?page=117
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http
).
---Original Email---
Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] surface=unpaved
>From :mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
Date :Tue Jan 11 13:27:03 America/Chicago 2011
> http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/floodrelief/gallery-fn7ik2te-1225983067381?page=90
Here's another example:
http://www.news.com.
nd not only had roads wash out, but some railway tracks
> as well. The flood was later classified as a thousand-year flood (meaning,
> not likely to occur more than once in a thousand years).
>
> -------Original Email---
> Subject :Re: [OSM-talk] surface=unpaved
> From :mailto:
On 12 January 2011 05:46, wrote:
> Nashville, Tennessee, USA, where I live, was hit by severe flooding on May 1
> and May 2, 2010, and not only had roads wash out, but some railway tracks as
> well. The flood was later classified as a thousand-year flood (meaning, not
> likely to occur more t
2011/1/11 Pieren :
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 6:04 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> wrote:
>>
>> will be unpaved: there is cobblestone, surface=asphalt,
>>
>
> Excuse the stupidity of my question, but what is the difference between
> 'paved' and 'asphalt' ?
it's different concepts: paved doesn't tell yo
If someone feels like reviewing the stylesheet and providing a patch,
I'd go for dashed casings rather than solid casings where surface is
specified and it's not one of a small set (paved, asphalt, concrete,
paving_stones).
I've used a similar scheme on my local map (for distinguishing the
quality
18 matches
Mail list logo
