Ah, I think I see what you're saying. What zoom level do you expect it to render at? The current stylesheet doesn't render county boundaries until z11, period.
My reading of the stylesheet [1] is that by not specifying an admin level you're abusing the "admin-other" category and making it render at lower zoom. If you want counties to intentionally render at z9 good luck getting someone to change the style :P. I do agree that it would look nicer if it rendered them at lower zoom. - Daniel [1] http://svn.openstreetmap.org/applications/rendering/mapnik/inc/layer-admin.xml.inc On Feb 9, 2011, at 6:36 PM, Toby Murray wrote: > What you say makes perfect sense. But you got my situation wrong. When > admin_level=6 *IS* specified on the way it doesn't render until z11. > When it is only on the relation but NOT on the way then it renders at > z9. > > Toby > > On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Daniel Sabo <daniels...@gmail.com> wrote: >> It's not really a bug, if you have the following setup: >> >> Member way: >> boundary = administrative >> >> Relation: >> boundary = administrative >> admin_level = 6 >> >> What you're telling mapnik is that there are two boundaries, one is >> admin_level 6, the other is admin_level undefined. The admin 6 one will >> render at z11 or closer, the undefined one renders at z9 to z11. >> >> To map the boundary as a relation you should have: >> >> Member way: >> no boundary tags (that includes the boundary name) >> >> Relation: >> boundary = administrative >> admin_level = 6 >> name = Something >> >> Boundary relations are just specialized multipolygons once they reach the >> renderer so all the rules here apply: >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon#Usage >> >> - Daniel >> >> On Feb 9, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Toby Murray wrote: >> >>> Well like I said, leaving the admin_level=6 on the ways is indeed >>> tagging for the renderer. However isn't there still a mapnik bug here >>> no matter how you look at it? Shouldn't an admin_level=6 boundary be >>> rendered at the same zoom level whether it is mapped as a relation or >>> as a way? >>> >>> Toby >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> talk mailing list >>> talk@openstreetmap.org >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
