Hi, > There's no such thing as "base maps" or "special maps", just "maps". > Just because the standard OSM Mapnik layer doesn't have a single- > interest focus (as the cycle map does) doesn't mean it deserves to > become cluttered with whatever bonkers tag someone has voted on this > week.
Richard, I think you're hitting a strawman here. Stefan has never actually proposed to put every conceivable object on every map. "Remaining updated on all keys", as he said, doesn't mean that "all these keys" should be present on the map. Whenever I do a custom Osmarender style, I usually start with the z17 style sheet which contains almost "everything"; it is much more convenient to take that and remove everything I don't want than to start with, say, a z12 style and insert all the extra presentation rules I might need. I understood Stefan's request to go in that direction - let us create rendering rules for all objects and then use them selectively to create the maps we want. (That said, I don't perceive SLD as a very suitable format for handling OSM styles. It's just too standard.) And another thing: > One of the things I like best about Steve (Chilton)'s Mapnik > cartography is that it doesn't try to render "all these keys". This is not a special feature of the Mapnik cartography but of every single OSM cartography I've seen to date. - Just in case you were trying to suggest that the Osmarender guys would thoughtlessly clutter their maps. Which you weren't of course ;-) By the way, the Mapnik map does render pubs on zoom levels 16 to 18 (with names on 17 and 18), but it doesn't render restaurants. At all. On any zoom level. Is that negligence or maybe just "UK centricism"? Bye Frederik _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
