Re: [Talk-ca] Merging huge wooded areas?

over-complicating :) the 'wooded area' doesnt actually mean that much other than stating 'Hey, there is trees over there' Once the national/regional/local parks are listed, along with the admin boundaries (something better than stats can) and the property boundaries get listed. ... and

Re: [Talk-ca] Merging huge wooded areas?

On Thu, 2 Sep 2010 04:41:02 -0700, Sam Vekemans acrosscanadatra...@gmail.com wrote: over-complicating :) That tends to be my modus operandi. the 'wooded area' doesnt actually mean that much other than stating 'Hey, there is trees over there' Well, it DOES look really nice to see it on

Re: [Talk-ca] Merging huge wooded areas?

Bonjour Tyler and all, From my own experience, I would strongly recommend not to merge large adjacent wooded (or anything else) areas. Furthermore, If I remember well, Frank Steggink tried the same and he decided to keep distinct relations - no merging. One of the reasons behind Canvec data

Re: [Talk-ca] Merging huge wooded areas?

Yeah maybe this is a problem that can be fixed by the renderers? OpenCycleMap looks especially bad because it shows the outlines of forests. Russell On 2010-09-02, at 7:52 AM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote: It sounds like I was over-complicating things just to avoid a little line here and