Alex I've made some changes to the lowzoom stylesheet and done some test rendering.
A small vertical strip in the middle of this tile has been re-rendered with the new stylesheet: http://b.tah.openstreetmap.org/Tiles/tile/8/67/98.png (south-west of Cincinnati if you want to look at closer on a slippy map). I've made the following changes: 1) State borders are thicker 2) Secondary roads are narrower and the colour saturation has been reduced 3) Railway lines are a little blacker. What do you think? 80n On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 11:53 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 80n wrote: > > > Agree, although someone commented recently that many secondary roads > > imported by TIGER should more realistically be tagged as tertiary. > > Also, if you're referring to my post on the US regional list, I'm still > kind of up in the air about it. I think I see a need for a road level > between tertiary and unclassified. > > County highways (imported from TIGER as secondary) are generally larger > and/or more significant than the other roads around them, but usually > less so than state highways which are also imported from TIGER as > secondary. > > But then, some county highways are larger than some state highways, so > it's kind of a toss-up. > > I think my proposal, > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Highway_administrative_and_physical_descriptions > attempts to address this kind of problem. > > -Alex Mauer "hawke" > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
