On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you show me how to make rendering rules (I am mostly interested in
Mapnik, but any renderer will do as a proof of concept), which does not draw
a border line along the coastline of Germany and at the territorial waters
On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 08:57:07PM +0100, Gustav Foseid wrote:
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote:
This is not intended to solve all problems with tagging of maritime
borders, just as a temporary way to tag these borders without causing
bubbles around
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
Actually the best we have is the actual tagging in the database. Works
wonderfully.
I disagree.
Can you show me how to make rendering rules (I am mostly interested in
Mapnik, but any renderer will do as a proof of
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
Actually the best we have is the actual tagging in the database. Works
wonderfully.
I disagree.
Can you show me how to make rendering rules (I am
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:07 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Tagging the appropriate parts with maritime=yes or something would add
valuable semantic information about these borders. It would also then make
it very easy for renderers to suppress them or render them differently.
One of the
Hi,
Gustav Foseid wrote:
If we tag maritime borders the
same way as land borders, it will be very difficult for someone using OSM
data to avoid drawing halos, with todays renderers I would even call it
impossible.
You have probably not read the posting to which Jochen refers. It is here:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
You have probably not read the posting to which Jochen refers. It is here:
Read, but not understood (even if I did try...)
It distinguishes between boundary=administrative (which would denote the
political
Gustav Foseid schrieb:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Crucially, the coastline ways are never tagged with any boundary tag; they
are just included as-is in the land_area=administrative relation.
So, a renderer will need to understand realtions to
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 11:07:17 +, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
Actually the best we have is the actual tagging in the database. Works
wonderfully.
2009/2/9 Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org:
On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 08:57:07PM +0100, Gustav Foseid wrote:
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote:
This is not intended to solve all problems with tagging of maritime
borders, just as a temporary way to tag these
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 05:20:51PM +, Thomas Wood wrote:
I see no reason why the relation model cannot apply with a tagging of
boundary=maritime on the maritime sections of the boundary.
The required ways will still be retrievable from a (correctly
produced) relation, so the primary
2009/2/9 Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org:
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 05:20:51PM +, Thomas Wood wrote:
I see no reason why the relation model cannot apply with a tagging of
boundary=maritime on the maritime sections of the boundary.
The required ways will still be retrievable from a (correctly
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
Simple rendering without need for the relation has been taken care of
in the comprehensive proposal by tagging the ways with admin_level. What
else do you need?
You have taken care of the wrong part of rendering. It is easy
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 06:30:31PM +, Thomas Wood wrote:
Why are they different? I don't see that.
Adding new tags (here boundary=maritime) always has a cost. Every
software that wants to do something with the data has to know about it.
Some software will want to differentiate, most
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 20:44:38 +0100, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 07:24:00PM +0100, Aun Johnsen (via Webmail)
wrote:
Maritime borders are by their nature different from administrative
borders on land, so I think that using boundary=maritime rather than
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 08:01:12PM +0100, Gustav Foseid wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
Simple rendering without need for the relation has been taken care of
in the comprehensive proposal by tagging the ways with admin_level. What
else do you
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 10:00:04PM +0100, Aun Johnsen (via Webmail) wrote:
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 20:44:38 +0100, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 07:24:00PM +0100, Aun Johnsen (via Webmail)
wrote:
Maritime borders are by their nature different from administrative
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Jochen Topf joc...@remote.org wrote:
But! There always is a but, isn't there. :-) When I look at popular
maps, a very common thing is to only paint part of the map boundaries in
the water. Normally only out from the coast for a few kilometers and
maybe
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com wrote:
This is not intended to solve all problems with tagging of maritime
borders, just as a temporary way to tag these borders without causing
bubbles around all coastlines in all general purpose renderers.
Some more progess
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
Ugh. Can we (ping steve8) get some way of tagging this differently so it
_doesn't_ show? It looks really, really ugly.
As a temporary solution, I suggest that until a proper tagging scheme for
maritime borders are
Thomas Wood wrote:
In other news, I've converted the 12nm line around the UK and Ireland
to be fully tagged, so it's now showing in its own bubble on the
mapnik render.
Ugh. Can we (ping steve8) get some way of tagging this differently so it
_doesn't_ show? It looks really, really ugly.
Very well, it also gives me a reason to revert the bits that somebody
deleted around the north west coast of scotland...
2009/1/4 Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net
wrote:
Ugh. Can we (ping steve8) get some way of tagging
IMO, the proposal of Gustav is better, because maritime borders clearly
are administrative. Martijn suggests that there is a clear difference
between country and maritime borders. However, it are different
properties of a border: a border can be one or both. The half of the
Dutch country
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Thomas Wood grand.edgemas...@gmail.comwrote:
In other news, I've converted the 12nm line around the UK and Ireland
to be fully tagged, so it's now showing in its own bubble on the
mapnik render.
In my mind, these halos around al islands, are in itself a good
boundary=maritime?
They are not political boundaries in the way countries are, since you
can't actually physically mark them in any useful way. It's more like,
in this area we consider you subject to our laws. Whether anyone
cares is quite another issue.
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Martijn van Oosterhout klep...@gmail.comwrote:
boundary=maritime?
or something like:
boundary=administrative
admin_maritime=territorial
?
- Gustav
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 1:37 AM, Rory McCann r...@technomancy.org wrote:
Some land borders, e.g. between Ireland and the UK are like that. No
border control.
It is not exactly the same. Anyone (say a person from Morocco or Colombia)
is not allowed to walk across Ireland on his way to the UK
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 1:26 PM, D Tucny d...@tucny.com wrote:
I'm not exactly up on laws, rules, treaties and agreements etc regarding
borders and controls, but, is this not about politics? If Someone from,
using your example, Morocco, flies to the UK via Ireland, they also won't
need to go
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 9:44 AM, Steven te Brinke
s.tebri...@student.utwente.nl wrote:
The maritime borders clearly are administrative and probably are admin_level
2. However, on the wiki Iceland has defined the EEZ to be admin_level 1. I
It's not actually used though, Iceland only has
2008/12/31 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ava...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 9:44 AM, Steven te Brinke
s.tebri...@student.utwente.nl wrote:
The maritime borders clearly are administrative and probably are admin_level
2. However, on the wiki Iceland has defined the EEZ to be admin_level 1. I
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Thomas Wood grand.edgemas...@gmail.com wrote:
2008/12/31 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason ava...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 9:44 AM, Steven te Brinke
s.tebri...@student.utwente.nl wrote:
The maritime borders clearly are administrative and probably are admin_level
In Europe a number of maritime borders have been tagged recently as
national
borders, with boundary=administrative and admin_level=2.
Exactly what is tagged varies:
North of Norway: A part of the exclusive economic zone
Finland: 24 mile contiguous zone
South of Sweden: Looks like an
On 30/12/08 21:44, Richard Bullock wrote:
This is, at best, confusing and, at worst, wrong. The territorial waters
and
contiguous zones have very different legal status from a national border,
you can for instance pass through the territorial waters of a nation
without
any border controls
33 matches
Mail list logo
