Re: [Tagging] Parking Lots
2010/5/16 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: +1 I submitted a ticket to revert this change : http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/2970 Mapnik cannot display all tags and all information in OSM. Showing all private things will result of an unreadable map. It depends on the way the information is displayed. Of course it is always easy to simply ignore features and get therefore a lightweighted map, but if you render (in the case of private parkings) just the area filling without any Icon (or with a visually reduced icon like it is done now) you don't get an unreadable map, it simply gets more detailed without disturbing. IMHO part of the art is visualizing as many details and features as possible without jumping in the viewer's eye. This is done by e.g. choosing decent colours and selecting the right lineweights and zoom-levels. Cluttering and crowded unreadable maps on the other hand occur mostly from displaying stuff at wrong zoomlevels and from extensive use of icons. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking Lots
On 16 May 2010 03:18, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: 2) We fix the definition of parking and change the renderer. #2 is my favorite solution, as it seems the most right. #3 is my least favorite solution, since it's all high quality data. A slight twist on #2, you add sub-tags. amenity=parking parking=parking_lot|side_parking| then you can fix the rendering without trying to shoe horn the access tags. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking Lots
Am 15.05.2010 19:18, Serge Wroclawski: 2) We fix the definition of parking and change the renderer. Redefining an established tag won't work. How will you ensure that the remaining... hundreds of thousands of occurances of amenity=parking comply to your new definition? So you should rather go for getting the access tagging correctly by on the ground surveying. Claudius ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking Lots
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Katie Filbert filbe...@gmail.com wrote: Regarding rendering, two weeks ago, a change was made to the Mapnik rendering: Yeah, I forgot to mention that, since the changeset I applied last night was assuming the old rules. - Serge ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Parking Lots
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Claudius Henrichs claudiu...@gmx.de wrote: Am 15.05.2010 19:18, Serge Wroclawski: 2) We fix the definition of parking and change the renderer. Redefining an established tag won't work. How will you ensure that the remaining... hundreds of thousands of occurances of amenity=parking comply to your new definition? I think the definition is wrong, and we're a wiki. I could go in an change the one line about lots (since it doesn't make sense anyway). The tag is accurate, it's a parking area. My main concern is really the way the data is displayed in mapnik. As Katie pointed out, some change to that was made recently which had effects to DC in a very negative way. So you should rather go for getting the access tagging correctly by on the ground surveying. I collect plenty of data for OSM, but see no reason to duplicate the hard work that's already been done by professionals. Of course you're welcome to do so. - Serge ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
