'officially' encoded?
-- S.
2008/3/17 Andy Robinson (blackadder) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Andy Allan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 17 March 2008 4:20 PM
To: Andy Robinson (blackadder)
Cc: Robert (Jamie) Munro; dev
Subject: Re: [OSM-dev] Advice sought on polygon-with-hole drawing
On Mon, Mar
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Robert (Jamie) Munro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. That is what I am saying. 1 simple rule:
*All* areas should be colour on the right (i.e. clockwise)
No chance. This is a completely terrible idea. It makes it harder for
newbies, who have to know to check
Robert Vollmert wrote:
However, I believe it would be quite easy to make such a rule obvious
to users, by attaching a few pixels of shading to the right of ways
with area tags in the editors.
I'm not sure that this would be at all easy to code (or quick to run)
in Actionscript, sadly, or
On Mar 17, 2008, at 13:33, Andy Allan wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 10:43 AM, Robert (Jamie) Munro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. That is what I am saying. 1 simple rule:
*All* areas should be colour on the right (i.e. clockwise)
No chance. This is a completely terrible idea. It makes it
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Andy Robinson (blackadder)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Direction is important for one-way roads but shoudn't be for areas.
Coastline is an understandable exception.
And even that's easy for a user to swap around without realising the affect.
Indeed.
In
Andy Allan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 17 March 2008 4:20 PM
To: Andy Robinson (blackadder)
Cc: Robert (Jamie) Munro; dev
Subject: Re: [OSM-dev] Advice sought on polygon-with-hole drawing
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Andy Robinson (blackadder)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Direction
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 03:32:45PM +, 80n wrote:
Sometimes this is unavoidable. Consider a commercial area
(landuse=commercial) surrounded by a residential area
(landuse=residential). It's not possible to create a single way that can be
used as the boundary for both these features as
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 02:06:04AM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Merkaartor fully supports them (both in editing and rendering)
Good to know. So for a lake with an island, Merkaartor only requires
tags on the relation, and neither on the lake circumference way nor on
the island circumference
What we need is some decent test data.
http://www.elbruz.org/islands/Islands%20and%20Lakes.htm
Anyone fancy a mapping party in Luzon?
80n
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 6:45 AM, bvh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 02:06:04AM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Merkaartor fully supports
On Mar 14, 2008, at 00:05, Frederik Ramm wrote:
I'm currently working on a Perl re-implementation of Osmarender. It
is already almost feature complete; I've made an early announcement on
the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list:
Great!
change is the way polygons with holes are drawn. I want to switch
On Mar 14, 2008, at 10:01, Andy Robinson ((blackadder)) wrote:
If I've got this all wrong then someone point me to better
understand the
problem.
Small point: This is also about, say, clearings in forests and
cemeteries in parks.
Cheers
Robert
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of 80n
Sent: 14 March 2008 8:49 AM
To: dev@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-dev] Advice sought on polygon-with-hole drawing
What we need is some decent test data.
http://www.elbruz.org/islands/Islands%20and%20Lakes.htm
Anyone fancy a mapping party in Luzon?
80n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Frederik Ramm wrote:
| Hi,
|
| I think we should stick with the evenodd rule. It is not that difficult
| for users when editing - colour on the right, it is neccesary for
| coastlines, and there is nothing to gain by making it unneccesary. If
| some
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:39 AM, bvh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I disagree. Requiring mappers to add two ways that overlap
completly is with the goal of making the math simpler is
shifting the burden from software to users.
On Mar 14, 2008, at 16:32, 80n wrote:
Sometimes this is unavoidable.
Jon Burgess wrote:
From a pure design perspective the cleanest approach would be (IMO) to
have the tags only on the relation. Otherwise there is always the
possibility for ambiguity in cases where the tags on the outer ways
differ. Yes this is an error, but one which is bound to occur
Hi,
I'm currently working on a Perl re-implementation of Osmarender. It
is already almost feature complete; I've made an early announcement on
the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tilesathome/2008-March/001903.html
While the program generally aims to be 100%
Hi,
I think we should stick with the evenodd rule. It is not that difficult
for users when editing - colour on the right, it is neccesary for
coastlines, and there is nothing to gain by making it unneccesary. If
some renderers don't need the rule, it's going to be much harder to tell
people
Hi,
Do you think this would work? I'm a bit unsure about ignoring the tags
on the relation; ideally these should override tags on the outer way,
if specified (or no?). But since nobody supports that anyway at the
moment, I thought we can leave that for later.
Merkaartor fully supports
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 6:15 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
If I understand this correctly, then for a forested island in a lake
you'd
need to have the island twice in the osm data. Once for the hole in the
lake
and once for the forest on the island.
No.
Assuming for
19 matches
Mail list logo
