On Sat, 2011-02-12 at 14:10 -0500, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > On 2/12/2011 2:01 PM, Val Kartchner wrote: > > That was it. I split the parking lot at the boundary of the land use, > > and it now renders correctly. I'll have to keep this in mind when I'm > > drawing parking. > > > > I figured that since there was very little separation between parking > > lots that it should be done as one big one. > > Oh, I didn't even notice the big area to the north. I was talking about > the small commercial lot off 48th. Since the two large areas do in fact > share parking with absolutely no separation, it's probably best to treat > them as one parcel and use the more prominent landuse value (or should > it be commercial by default, since retail is a subset of commercial?). > Then you can indicate the actual uses of each building (which may be > mixed; an office building might have a cafe on the first floor). > > (By the way, the commercial parking to the north still goes slightly > into the retail area. Maybe Mapnik calculates the area and draws from > biggest to smallest?) > > An area (parking lot, pedestrian, whatever) should only be one piece if > it's all connected. Since you can't enter the retail parking lot and get > to the small south commercial parking, they should be two separate > areas, close *but not touching*.
Okay, I've fixed both of the problems that you noted. I do like to make things as detailed as I'm able when I'm mapping. - Val - _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
