I have updated the Mottram area to reflect the 'proposed' tagging. Part of the route is a proposed trunk road and part is a proposed primary road. I have wrapped the new roads up as a relationship and include a wikipedia link. I am also possibly testing the outer limits of rendering by including a proposed tunnel which forms part of the scheme (something which certainly wasn't possible using the dirty hack!) It isn't re-rendered in mapnik yet but will be here. http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.4656&lon=-2.002&zoom=13&layers=B0FT
I have also added information for the A14 Haughley Bends scheme including It some proposed 'trunk_link' sections and details of the demotion of parts of the existing carriageways to a tertiary road and a bridleway. It isn't rendered in mapnik yet. http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.21342&lon=0.95612&zoom=15&layers=B0FT Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Burgess [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 31 March 2008 23:31 > To: Peter Miller > Cc: 'Steve Chilton'; 'Dave Stubbs'; 'Talk Openstreetmap' > Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed > bypass > > I have deployed Steve's changes and one example which has rendered > already is the current alterations to M1 J8: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.75704&lon=- > 0.41518&zoom=16&layers=B0FT > > In the current Mapnik osm.xml file a road will render in the same dashed > style if it has highway={proposed,construction} regardless of the > proposed= or construction= tag. In both cases the name= tag will be used > for the text. > > This construction has recently moved the position of the entry/exit > roads on the Eastern side of the junction. Someone corrected this data > earlier this week and the updates are shown already on the Osmarender > layer. > > Jon > > > On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 21:48 +0100, Peter Miller wrote: > > Excellent. Thanks Steve. > > > > So how should a proposed road be tagged? Should it be highway=proposed > > Proposed=trunk Name=foo bypass? > > > > > > Peter > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Steve Chilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: 31 March 2008 20:53 > > > To: Dave Stubbs; Peter Miller > > > Cc: Talk Openstreetmap > > > Subject: RE: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed bypass > > > > > > In an attempt to avoid this kind of "false tagging for rendering" I > have a > > > submitted an addition to the mapnik style tonight. > > > It will render highway=construction or highway=proposed from z12 > upwards. > > > It will also render a text label (based on name=) for z13 upwards. > > > Jamie's more sophisticated suggestions make sense but are not easily > to > > > render at the moment. Perhaps we can work towards that time-based > approach > > > later. > > > For now it would make a lot of sense for people to revisit roads under > > > construction they have tagged and follow this suggested scheme: > > > highway=construction > > > construction=foo (motorway, trunk, primary or whatever - if known) > > > name=Foo bypass, due to open Dec 08 (or whatever) > > > > > > PS: I haven't looked at the file but hope this doesn't throw > osmarender > > > rules out, which I know picks something up to render construction > > > > > > Cheers > > > STEVE > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Dave Stubbs > > > Sent: Mon 3/31/2008 6:03 PM > > > To: Peter Miller > > > Cc: Talk Openstreetmap > > > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Mapping Mottram and Tintwistle proposed > > > bypass > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Peter Miller > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Thanks for that Robert. A few other questions: > > > > > > > > 1) How does one tag something that is being considered seriously > > > (such as > > > > the Mottram Tintwistle bypass), but which may well never get > > > built? I think > > > > I will just put the estimated build date given by the highways > > > agency for > > > > now. (I will also continue to use the tunnel trick to get it to > > > render in > > > > the mean time). > > > > > > > > > By "tunnel trick" I presume that you mean tag it as a tunnel so that > > > it turns up dotted, despite not being a tunnel, nor ever will be a > > > tunnel? > > > > > > That's not a trick, that's a dirty, dirty hack and should be stomped > > > on hard. > > > > > > If you want proposed roads to show up dotted then fix the renderer, > > > don't engage in phantom tagging. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
