Norbert Wenzel wrote:
> I would only render some arrows if the default behaviour of the street
> tagged "oneway=no" would be "oneway=yes". That would make sense to me.
Yes, then my revised proposal - "rendering:oneway=yes" or
"rendering:complex_oneways=yes" or something similar as a rendering hi
Norbert Wenzel wrote:
I quite often use this tag, just because Mapnik has it in it's standard
entries for roads and I just fill them because they are proposed.
I just saw the bullsh*t I wrote. I meant Merkaartor, not Mapnik.
Shouldn't do three things at the same time I guess.
smime.p7s
Des
Tordanik wrote:
> > Alternate proposal:
> > New tag "render_oneway=yes" or new value for "oneway=no:visible".
>
> So it's plainly a rendering hint for a certain set of applications,
> right?
Yes. Currently there is no way to specify, that the highway layout is
very complex and the standard "one
Stanislav Brabec wrote:
oneway=no is the default in most cases, so it is rarely needed tag.
But once it is mentioned explicitly, it should be rendered somehow, as
the mapper probably wants to emphasize this fact.
[...]
I quite often use this tag, just because Mapnik has it in it's standard
en
2008/9/1 Stanislav Brabec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> oneway=no is the default in most cases, so it is rarely needed tag.
>
> But once it is mentioned explicitly, it should be rendered somehow, as
> the mapper probably wants to emphasize this fact.
I sometimes tag in this way. The only case I can think
oneway=no is the default in most cases, so it is rarely needed tag.
But once it is mentioned explicitly, it should be rendered somehow, as
the mapper probably wants to emphasize this fact.
Proposal:
Use "<->" symbol wherever "oneway=no" is explicitly used.
Alternate proposal:
New tag "render_on
6 matches
Mail list logo
