spaetz schreef:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 05:11:18PM +0200, Ben Laenen wrote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:highway=track and the map
features mentioned track is only for unpaved/unsealed roads. To me it
looks like it was approved like that, so please don't fix approved
Cartinus schreef:
On Thursday 12 June 2008 16:44:04 Sven Geggus wrote:
We have a whole lot of them here in germany and they are usually
paved or asphaltic ways, and they are different from unclassified, because
they are usually narrow and have access for tractors and bykes only.
If
Sven Geggus schreef:
Karl Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Umm... According to Map_Features, tracks are ALWAYS unpaved
If this would be the case, what should be use for an agricultural serviceway
(probably bad word by word translation of the german term
Landwirtschaftlicher Weg)?
spaetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I use highway=track for paved roads sometime. In Switzerland these
agricultural roads are sometimes of very high quality.
Same in Germany
Sven
--
We don't know the OS that God uses, but the Vatican uses Linux
(Sister Judith
Karl Newman schrieb:
Ah, so I only need 6249 more loonies! :-) Thanks for the data to back this
up. I'm actually okay with the change, but I'm concerned with the cavalier
manner in which it was done.
The original Map_Features was put up in the same way. I don't see any
problem here.
It's a
I´d like to point up proposal of new smoothness tag, which seems to
solve the problems with tracktype and surface tags.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Smoothness
It would be IMHO great solution for the track rendering problem,
rendering could be also altered for special
Am Freitag, 13. Juni 2008 07:42:25 schrieb Karl Newman:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:18 PM, spaetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:34:06AM -0700, Karl Newman wrote:
So now I decide that since I drive really fast down my driveway, I
should call it highway=motorway and
At 09:50 AM 6/13/2008, Sven Geggus wrote:
spaetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I use highway=track for paved roads sometime. In Switzerland these
agricultural roads are sometimes of very high quality.
Same in Germany
An alternative is to use highway=service, surface=paved since they
are access
At 09:50 AM 6/13/2008, Sven Geggus wrote:
spaetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I use highway=track for paved roads sometime. In Switzerland these
agricultural roads are sometimes of very high quality.
Same in Germany
An alternative is to use highway=service, surface=paved since they
On Friday 13 June 2008 03:54:42 Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
If there is some legal reason for it to be only accessible by bikes and
tractors, then you'll need to use access restrictions
(access=no;agriculture=yes;bicycle=yes;foot=yes) anyway, as there is
nothing that says normal cars are
Marc Schütz wrote:
An alternative is to use highway=service, surface=paved since they
are access roads within a property(?) just the same as universities,
hospitals and industry.
No, they are usually public ways, not within a property.
I don't think that's necessarily true, and has no
On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 23:24 +0200, Rainer Dorsch wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juni 2008 schrieb Richard Fairhurst:
Frank Sautter wrote:
i agree with you!
my idea of how this should be rendered is:
grade1: just like highway=service
[...]
It's worth noting that tracktype is not a
i agree with you!
my idea of how this should be rendered is:
grade1: just like highway=service
[...]
It's worth noting that tracktype is not a universally welcome tag - a
lot of people think having an arbitrary scale isn't very OSM-like,
and that it's better to tag specific characteristics.
Nick Whitelegg wrote:
i agree with you! my idea of how this should be rendered is:
grade1: just like highway=service [...]
It's worth noting that tracktype is not a universally welcome tag -
a lot of people think having an arbitrary scale isn't very
OSM-like, and that it's better to tag
Andy Allan wrote:
Meh. It's on my list of things to do, but to be honest I don't see it
as very important. There's lots of things that the cycle map doesn't
render at all, and for one I see distinguishing onroad/offroad cycle
routes as more important than the difference between tracktypes;
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 04:43:36AM -0700, Alex S. wrote:
Andy Allan wrote:
Meh. It's on my list of things to do, but to be honest I don't see it
as very important. There's lots of things that the cycle map doesn't
render at all, and for one I see distinguishing onroad/offroad cycle
routes
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 4:43 AM, Alex S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andy Allan wrote:
Meh. It's on my list of things to do, but to be honest I don't see it
as very important. There's lots of things that the cycle map doesn't
render at all, and for one I see distinguishing onroad/offroad
Hi,
Umm... According to Map_Features, tracks are ALWAYS unpaved:
unpaved/unsealed roads for agricultural use; gravel roads in the
forest etc. There, your problem's solved--just avoid all tracks.
I have fixed Map_Features.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ##
Karl Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Umm... According to Map_Features, tracks are ALWAYS unpaved
If this would be the case, what should be use for an agricultural serviceway
(probably bad word by word translation of the german term
Landwirtschaftlicher Weg)?
We have a whole lot of them here in
Am Donnerstag, 12. Juni 2008 12:11:48 schrieb Frank Sautter:
Nick Whitelegg wrote:
i agree with you! my idea of how this should be rendered is:
grade1: just like highway=service [...]
It's worth noting that tracktype is not a universally welcome tag -
a lot of people think having an
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:highway=track and the map
features mentioned track is only for unpaved/unsealed roads. To me it
looks like it was approved like that, so please don't fix approved
descriptions before having a discussion and a vote first...
Greetings
Ben
On
Sven Geggus wrote:
We have a whole lot of them here in germany and they are usually
paved or asphaltic ways, and they are different from unclassified, because
they are usually narrow and have access for tractors and bykes only.
They are simular to a highway=service, which I tended to use
Hi,
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:highway=track and the map
features mentioned track is only for unpaved/unsealed roads. To me it
looks like it was approved like that, so please don't fix approved
descriptions before having a discussion and a vote first...
Map Features is
Ben Laenen schrieb:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:highway=track and the map
features mentioned track is only for unpaved/unsealed roads. To me it
looks like it was approved like that, so please don't fix approved
descriptions before having a discussion and a vote first...
Most
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:highway=track and the map
features mentioned track is only for unpaved/unsealed roads. To me it looks
like it was approved like that, so please don't fix approved
Karl Newman schrieb:
So now I decide that since I drive really fast down my driveway, I should
call it highway=motorway and start tagging driveways that way. Since that's
how it's used, I'm going to change Map Features to reflect that. Okay,
that's a bit extreme, but really, care should be
Hi,
So now I decide that since I drive really fast down my driveway, I should
call it highway=motorway and start tagging driveways that way. Since that's
how it's used, I'm going to change Map Features to reflect that. Okay,
that's a bit extreme, but really, care should be taken when changing
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Christoph Eckert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
So now I decide that since I drive really fast down my driveway, I should
call it highway=motorway and start tagging driveways that way. Since
that's
how it's used, I'm going to change Map Features to reflect
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:52 AM, Dirk-Lüder Kreie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Karl Newman schrieb:
So now I decide that since I drive really fast down my driveway, I should
call it highway=motorway and start tagging driveways that way. Since
that's
how it's used, I'm going to change Map
Hi,
It also shouldn't play host to graffiti.
well, it's wiki so you can revert it. Some call it edit war, though :-) .
Best regards,
ce
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
Karl Newman schrieb:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Christoph Eckert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
of course map features defines a kind of lingua franca for all mappers.
But
any language is subject to change. It's not a bible.
It also shouldn't play host to graffiti.
Funny that you think
Hi,
What if I get a bunch of other nutters to help me? :-D What's the
threshold for widespread use?
You could hold a vote on that ;-)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
talk mailing list
On Thursday 12 June 2008 16:44:04 Sven Geggus wrote:
We have a whole lot of them here in germany and they are usually
paved or asphaltic ways, and they are different from unclassified, because
they are usually narrow and have access for tractors and bykes only.
If it is wide enough to be
Hi,
If there is some legal reason for it to be only accessible by bikes and
tractors, then you'll need to use access restrictions
(access=no;agriculture=yes;bicycle=yes;foot=yes) anyway, as there is nothing
that says normal cars are not allowed to use tracks of grade1
I don't know if this
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 05:11:18PM +0200, Ben Laenen wrote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Tag:highway=track and the map
features mentioned track is only for unpaved/unsealed roads. To me it
looks like it was approved like that, so please don't fix approved
descriptions before
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:34:06AM -0700, Karl Newman wrote:
So now I decide that since I drive really fast down my driveway, I should
call it highway=motorway and start tagging driveways that way. Since that's
how it's used, I'm going to change Map Features to reflect that. Okay,
that's a
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:18 PM, spaetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:34:06AM -0700, Karl Newman wrote:
So now I decide that since I drive really fast down my driveway, I should
call it highway=motorway and start tagging driveways that way. Since
that's
how it's
Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's because the Mapnik layer aims to be a nice looking map and not one
that has it all.
Despite of this it would IMO be still much mor appropriate to render
tracktype=grade1 in the same form as highway=service.
If we don't want to have mapnik render
Frederik Ramm wrote:
I am wondering why mapnik is makeing no attempt to render the
different tracktypes we have in our mapdata.
It's because the Mapnik layer aims to be a nice looking map and not
one that has it all.
well, i think obeying the tracktype would make the map nicer, as all
those
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Sven Geggus
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's because the Mapnik layer aims to be a nice looking map and not one
that has it all.
Despite of this it would IMO be still much mor appropriate to render
tracktype=grade1 in the
Frank Sautter wrote:
i agree with you!
my idea of how this should be rendered is:
grade1: just like highway=service
[...]
It's worth noting that tracktype is not a universally welcome tag - a
lot of people think having an arbitrary scale isn't very OSM-like,
and that it's better to tag
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juni 2008 schrieb Frank Sautter:
my idea of how this should be rendered is:
grade1: just like highway=service
grade2: continous brown line (maybe less bold than tracks are currently
rendered)
grade3: dashed brown line (the current style for tracks, maybe less bold)
grade4:
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juni 2008 schrieb Richard Fairhurst:
Frank Sautter wrote:
i agree with you!
my idea of how this should be rendered is:
grade1: just like highway=service
[...]
It's worth noting that tracktype is not a universally welcome tag - a
lot of people think having an arbitrary
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juni 2008 schrieb Andy Allan:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Sven Geggus
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's because the Mapnik layer aims to be a nice looking map and not one
that has it all.
Despite of this it would IMO be still
Hello,
I am wondering why mapnik is makeing no attempt to render the different
tracktypes we have in our mapdata.
What surprises me even more is that cyclemap is differentiate the tracktype in
the renderer...
This was probably discussed before, if yes, has anybody a pointer?
Many thanks,
Hi,
I am wondering why mapnik is makeing no attempt to render the different
tracktypes we have in our mapdata.
It's because the Mapnik layer aims to be a nice looking map and not one
that has it all.
This was probably discussed before,
Very true:
46 matches
Mail list logo
