On 27/01/13 15:38, the Old Topo Depot wrote:
You may want to cross post to the broader talk list as well, as I have
heard rumors of work related to this but have no knowledge regarding status.
I read via Gmane, so I could be wrong, but I thought this _was_ the
broad talk list for OSM...
Gerv
(Sorry I'm late back to this discussion.)
On 27/01/13 11:39, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
If you want to make it happen, the best way to do this is to take part in
the project to port the current stylesheet to Carto:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto
and to make sure that
One little step towards zoom 19 :
http://tile.openstreetmap.fr:13080/?zoom=19lat=48.87164lon=2.30134layers=0B
That's a new, fast server* under test (but hooked to my home DSL line
so be patient).
* see on wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Servers/Hardware#Dell_R610
2013/2/13
On 18/01/13 14:29, Gervase Markham wrote:
Who do we need to talk to or where do we need to file a bug to get this
request considered officially?
Anyone?
Gerv
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Gervase Markham wrote:
Who do we need to talk to or where do we need to file a bug to get this
request considered officially?
Anyone?
If you want to make it happen, the best way to do this is to take part in
the project to port the current stylesheet to Carto:
Gerv,
You may want to cross post to the broader talk list as well, as I have
heard rumors of work related to this but have no knowledge regarding status.
Best
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 3:39 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
Gervase Markham wrote:
Who do we need to talk to or
2013/1/27 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net:
Gervase Markham wrote:
Who do we need to talk to or where do we need to file a bug to get this
request considered officially?
Anyone?
If you want to make it happen, the best way to do this is to take part in
the project to port the current
On 27/01/2013 16:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
IMHO there is no connection between the port to a different style
sheet language and the decision which zoom level gets rendered.
The connection is that the current stylesheet is abandonware. If
anything is to be fixed then it'll be in the Carto
2013/1/27 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net:
Space requirements depend mostly on the actual usage (how many of them
would be created). I guess it wouldn't make sense to prerender them
I guess is nice for mailing lists, but the sysadmins can't be asked to
make decisions based on a guess.
A quick extrapolation re space is to take rendered zl18 tile size, in
total, and multiply by 4. If someone can provide the zl18 number ...
It seems reasonable to expect zl19 tiles to be of most interest in urban
areas with high POI density, as those areas tend to drop display data due
to
On 27-1-2013 17:23, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
current XML would render sufficiently well when you remove the
minscale_zoom=18 filters. If convincingly implies different
The minscale_zoom18 essentially translates to 'infinity' in the current
stylesheet setup:
!ENTITY minscale_zoom18
The
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
+1, the more you zoom in, the more you wish there were highway areas.
No you don't.
http://not.textual.ru/zverik/2/3/mapsurfer-areahighway-spb.png
Highway areas look ugly, even at zoom 18.
Openstreetmap.by also renders those areas:
On 13/01/13 21:23, Christian Quest wrote:
You can see what zoom level 19 looks like with Mapnik/cartocss style
on
http://layers.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=19lat=48.87206lon=2.30069layers=B
That's so much better than 18; all the shops are labelled.
Gerv
On 15/01/13 04:09, Jaakko Helleranta.com wrote:
But I would say in any case that the reality as I see it builds
increasing need for very high zoom levels. ... I recently switched to
OsmAnd on my Android because it zooms upto level 23
Ah, that might be where I saw higher zoom levels. I use
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Christian Quest
cqu...@openstreetmap.fr wrote:
You can see what zoom level 19 looks like with Mapnik/cartocss style on
http://layers.openstreetmap.fr/?zoom=19lat=48.87206lon=2.30069layers=B
That looks excellent; I'm sure this would be
It could be improved for example by making use of width=* or lanes=* to
adapt the highway widths.
I think its the main thing that looks strange on the zoom 19 rendering.
2013/1/18 John Sturdy jcg.stu...@gmail.com
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Christian Quest
cqu...@openstreetmap.fr wrote:
It does look strange when the Mapnik rendering doesn't seem to take
width into account when rendering the data. Especially when we've drawn
landuse areas around it (using fly-over imagery) and there's empty space
between their boundaries and the path.
- Svavar Kjarrval
On 18/01/13 14:42,
2013/1/18 Svavar Kjarrval sva...@kjarrval.is
It does look strange when the Mapnik rendering doesn't seem to take width
into account when rendering the data. Especially when we've drawn landuse
areas around it (using fly-over imagery) and there's empty space between
their boundaries and the
2013/1/18 Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com:
2013/1/18 Svavar Kjarrval sva...@kjarrval.is
It does look strange when the Mapnik rendering doesn't seem to take width
into account when rendering the data. Especially when we've drawn landuse
areas around it (using fly-over imagery) and there's empty
Hi,
On 18.01.2013 20:33, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
We'll have to start drawing roads as areas at some point. That point is
probably not close, and layers would probably help with the huge amount of
vectors we are going to get. But I think it has to happen.
+1, the more you zoom in, the more
On 18/01/2013 14:29, Gervase Markham wrote:
That's so much better than 18; all the shops are labelled.
Gerv
+1
This is the primary reason mapnik needs a higher zoom level. More
detailed mapping like shops is on the the increase at z18 the
labelling of any object seems a bit random to
Big hand to OSM.fr for offering the z19!
I've asked about this need before and will now just +1 the need for this
also at osm.org.
I would also welcome z20 -- perhaps with some request base limits
(requested urban areas -- possibility to handle in more or less similar
fashion as Mike does the
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.comwrote:
If mappers in Europe and North America think that z18 doesn't show enough
detail, then imagine what it must be like for mappers who are located
nearer to the equator. Because of the Mercator projection we use, higher
On 13-01-14 0:10, Kai Krueger wrote:
Of cause that would put extra pressure on the renderer, but during normal
operations (i.e. if it is not e.g. rerendering everything) it seems to still
have a fair amount of capacity left.
I agree that z20 and more would be very helpful on occasions - and
My memory may be playing tricks on me, but I'm sure it was once possible
to zoom in 1 more level than it is now, on the slippy map on
openstreetmap.org. This was useful because often what is simply an icon
at z=18 will turn into an icon plus a business name at z=19,
particularly when there are
Maperitive will give you even greater zoom levels off a local .osm map file.
Cheerio John
On 13 January 2013 15:23, Gervase Markham gerv-gm...@gerv.net wrote:
My memory may be playing tricks on me, but I'm sure it was once possible
to zoom in 1 more level than it is now, on the slippy map on
Hi,
On 13.01.2013 21:23, Gervase Markham wrote:
Did we ever do z=19?
To my knowledge, no.
Did we stop because it's a load more disk space, or
something like that? If not, could we consider it?
Given that very few areas are going to be even looked at at z19 I
suspect the additional disk
Frederik Ramm wrote
Hi,
On 13.01.2013 21:23, Gervase Markham wrote:
Did we ever do z=19?
To my knowledge, no.
I am also reasonably sure z19 never existed. Osmarender only used to go to
Z17 and so mapnik had one zoom level more than osmarender, but neither went
further than z18.
Frederik
28 matches
Mail list logo
