On Tuesday 21 July 2009 09:59:29 Jochen Topf wrote: > On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:36:21PM -0400, Ben Supnik wrote: > > Two things about multipolygons: > > > > 1. My software now detects topologically broken multipolygons, e.g. > > cases where I can't form rings out of the node list. Is this > > useful, or is this information already generated by things like > > pgsql? > > > > 2. While looking at one test set of data, I found a lake where one > > island (modeled as a hole in the lake multipolygon) had not been > > "sealed". > > > > Mapnik simply ignored the island, but osmarender had linked the > > start and end of the ways to form the island. > > > > I have learned from experience that it isn't useful for me to ask > > "what's the spec"...OSM is its own spec, etc. etc. > > > > So I'll just ask: any comments? Is one interpretation considered > > better or worse than the other? > > Depends on what you are doing. When you are generating a map that OSM > mappers will see, its probably better not to draw anything, to > encourage people to fix it. When using the data for maps not related > to OSM directly, it might be better to automagically fix things, > because people wont fix it anyway.
With Temap, I found it is much better to draw such things in bright red, that way they get fixed much much faster than when you just drop them - out of the sight, out of the mind :) All the best, Tels -- Signed on Thu Jul 23 09:39:03 2009 with key 0x93B84C15. View my photo gallery: http://bloodgate.com/photos PGP key on http://bloodgate.com/tels.asc or per email. "A witty saying proves nothing." -- Voltaire
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
