Ok, done.
Btw, I notice a lot of pairs of features like this:
<feature name="Slipway">
<line/>
...
</feature>
<feature name="Slipway">
<point />
...
</feature>
I guess the goal here is to have different icons for nodes vs areas?
If so, would it be a better idea to allow something like:
<feature name="Slipway">
<icon point="yes" image="features/pois/boat-launch-24.png"/>
<icon line="yes" image="features/waterway__slipway.png" />
<point />
<line />
...
</feature>
Just checking before I implement this* and then find out there was
another reason that I missed.
Also, what is the thinking around the text part of the <icon> element?
It seems a bit under-developed. Perhaps a more explicit <description>
element which explains what the entity represents (eg, text from the
wiki), and a <title> or something which uses string substitution to
summarise the entity?
Steve
* Not a promise.
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Steve Bennett <stevag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 9:15 PM, Richard Fairhurst <rich...@systemed.net>
> wrote:
>> Have you had any thoughts about supplying icons for the new amenities? I
>> don't think we can make something live with rows upon rows of ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
>> ? ? ?. (Brian's SJJB set is usually the best place to look.)
>
> As you can see from my terrible power=* icons, graphic design is not
> really my strength :) Perhaps we could consider getting a more
> attractive default icon?
>
> Will have a look at SJJB though.
>
> Steve
>
_______________________________________________
Potlatch-dev mailing list
potlatch-...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/potlatch-dev
