Stefan Keller wrote: > > Heavens, no. Why would we want three maps that look the same? > > They wouldn't because there is a common understanding about "portrayal > rules" (coming from ISO), which states that newer rules can override > older ones. With this approach you can profit from other rules. Remind > that I'm speaking only about base maps - not special maps. > > -- S. > > P.S. What I'm missing in most rule definitions from Mapnik, Osmarender > and Kosmos (as far as I know them) is that there is no rendering > priority, right? With that one could control explicitly e.g. the > rendering of parking whih overlap railway station symbols. > The whole point of Kosmos is to provide a simplified and (as much as possible) human readable and editable rendering rules, that's why I chose wiki tables for this. This approach has its own problems (not flexible enough, rules are not very powerful compared to Mapnik and Osmarender) and I'm still looking for an alternative, but a complex XML schema is not on the top of the list. As for including rules within rules (if I understand your idea correctly), this is on my Kosmos "todo" list.
About the rendering priority: the order of the Kosmos rules on the wiki page defines (more or less) their priority - see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Kosmos_Layering . I don't know about Mapnik, but Osmarender's rules are prioritized by ordering, too. Igor -- http://igorbrejc.net _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
