On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Richard Weait wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 8:39 AM, Lennard wrote:
>> Richard Weait wrote:
>>
>>> I think the provincial / state borders will continue to be yucky on
>>> the main map until mapnik supports rendering different style sheets
>>
>> As you guys in th
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 9:31 AM, Richard Weait wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 04:39 -0500, Joseph Jon Booker wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Apr 2009 01:54:12 -0500
>> Ian Dees wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 1:38 AM, Nicholas Vetrovec
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Posted on the US Page to help coor
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> network=us_i_2 # Interstate (2 digit) us_i_3 for 3 digit
> network=us_us_2 # US Route us_us_3 for 3 digit
> network=us_ny # NY State Route
> network=us_ny_county #
>
> That looks great to me, except that us_i_2 vs us_i_3 seems like taggi
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Apollinaris Schoell
wrote:
> this is great work, signs could be a bit smaller tough.
>
> why not stick with the symbol tag? see
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_roads_tagging
> the symbols tagging should be transparent to the mappers not only to
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Apollinaris Schoell
wrote:
>
> On 13 Apr 2009, at 5:36 , Adam Schreiber wrote:
>
>>
>> What about:
>>
>> addr:country=us
>> addr:state=ca
>> network=us
>>
>> or
>>
>> addr:country=us
>>
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:28 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> The US highways in California are really (I think) regular US highways,
> but CA uses a different kind of sign. So tagging then us_us_ca seems
> again like tagging for the renderer. This is sort of OK, perhaps, but
> it bothers me perhaps bec
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Ted Mielczarek
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
>>
>> Dear Can-Americans,
>>
>> This is silly. Four different lines for one border.
>>
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.99906&lon=-95.15362&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF
>>
>> We're
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
> Dear Can-Americans,
>
> This is silly. Four different lines for one border.
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=48.99906&lon=-95.15362&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF
>
> We're good neighbo(u)rs. We should fix our fence. Shouldn't each
> border b
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 6:59 AM, Richard Weait wrote:
> I've adjusted the boundary=admin rendering on my tile server to make
> more sense for North America. Rendering the state / provincial borders
> at zoom 1 & 2 might be overdoing it, but at zoom 3 looks reasonable. It
> does point out a poten
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 5:38 PM, SteveC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8 Jul 2008, at 14:37, Adam Schreiber wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 5:30 PM, SteveC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> I've had a chat with jon who runs the tile server and an inte
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 5:30 PM, SteveC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I've had a chat with jon who runs the tile server and an interim
>> solution to getting the great lakes and US/CA state borders on the
>> map is if there are Free shapefile(s) somewhere with said stuff on it.
>>
>> Can anyone help
11 matches
Mail list logo
