Andy Townsend wrote:
(6)
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:SomeoneElse/Your_tiles_from_osm.org
Interesting hack Andy, thanks
2015-07-14 6:18 GMT+01:00 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net:
Unfortunately I suspect what I'd choose works well for a
certain type of countryside, but
Dan S wrote:
Sounds good. Mind if I ask how it is done? (i.e. rendering rules
for rural vs town)
Post-import, I run a couple of queries along the lines of
UPDATE planet_osm_point SET urban=true FROM built_up_areas WHERE
ST_Contains(built_up_areas.geom,way)
using a pre-existing
On 13/07/2015 18:14, Andy Allan wrote:
On 13 July 2015 at 14:34, Mike Evans mi...@saxicola.co.uk wrote:
It seems to me that the viaduct and the railway are two separate
entities and should mapped as such. Just because an abandoned
railway happens to run on the top of the viaduct is irrelevant
Actually creating built-up areas from OSM data is fraught with problems:
the basic one, being that OSM landuse/landcover is too fine-grained for
identifying built-up areas. This is one of the examples in my category of
'emergent data': data which is sort of there, but is actually quite hard to
On 13 July 2015 at 08:53, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
The significant (and massive) disused railway viaduct near Thrapston:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/264894970
does not render on our default map
However, this viaduct of comparable size, does:
but that’s not really true.
Cheers
Andy
-Original Message-
From: Andy Townsend [mailto:ajt1...@gmail.com]
Sent: 14 July 2015 21:31
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Thrapston viaduct
On 14/07/2015 20:24, Andy Mabbett wrote:
The only significant difference seems
@openstreetmap.org
Subject: RE: [Talk-GB] Thrapston viaduct
We could take that line of thought further. A viaduct/bridge etc actually has
nothing to do with a railway per se. It’s a structural object in its own right.
What we should be doing is rendering the bridge structure first
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 14 Jul 2015, Andy Robinson wrote:
I've now reverted.
I fear that unless the render starts rendering
bridge={viaduct,yes,etc} such re-tagging is likely to continue---or
at least highway=track; access=private getting added to more things.
Is
Bridges and other significant remaining infrastructure of railways tagged
as railway=abandoned ceased to be rendered on the Standard rendering some
time ago. There was a degree of dissension with this decision:
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/542.
Certainly I recall a few
On Mon, 2015-07-13 at 10:25 +0100, SK53 wrote:
Bridges and other significant remaining infrastructure of railways
tagged as railway=abandoned ceased to be rendered on the Standard
rendering some time ago. There was a degree of dissension with this
decision:
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 08:53:57AM +0100, Andy Mabbett wrote:
The significant (and massive) disused railway viaduct near Thrapston:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/264894970
does not render on our default map:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/52.3914/-0.5433
despite being
Ah, that's a bit annoying.
This is also a significant structure:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38331305
Not least as a tourist attraction for fans of the film 'The Titfield
Thunderbolt' which was made along this stretch of line.
It can't be too hard to the carto scheme to check
On 13 July 2015 at 10:37, thomas van der veen th.vanderv...@gmail.com wrote:
Hockley Viaduct near Winchester does get rendered:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/108241777#map=18/51.03628/-1.32230
but probably because there is a path on it. Would that be a workaround for
you Andy?
Thank
Hockley Viaduct near Winchester does get rendered:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/108241777#map=18/51.03628/-1.32230
but probably because there is a path on it. Would that be a workaround for
you Andy?
Thomas
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 10:25 AM, SK53 sk53@gmail.com wrote:
Bridges and
On 13/07/2015 17:46, Paul Sladen wrote:
Any UK-specific rendering is not going to solve the core issue: that
large numbers of perfectly extent bridges and tunnels are not
rendered; Most of these old tunnels in Nottingham are not rendered:
Relation: Tunnels of Nottingham
Andy Townsend wrote:
OSM's standard map is currently trying to be the primary
feedback mechanism to mappers but also have clear
design (1). I genuinely don't believe that you can do both
well in one map style.
I think you can, but it requires serious cartographical chops, and - ideally
-
On Mon, 13 Jul 2015 13:40:26 +0100
ael law_ence@ntlworld.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 08:53:57AM +0100, Andy Mabbett wrote:
The significant (and massive) disused railway viaduct near Thrapston:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/264894970
does not render on our default
On 13 July 2015 at 14:34, Mike Evans mi...@saxicola.co.uk wrote:
It seems to me that the viaduct and the railway are two separate entities and
should mapped as such. Just because an abandoned railway happens to run on
the top of the viaduct is irrelevant in my opinion.
Exactly. If there was
On 13/07/15 16:09, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
I think this, and blue motorways, is a good argument for why we need a
UK render of the map.
I agree a UK-specific rendering would be very useful, especially now
the Default style is getting less and less UK-centric.
Seconded ...
While the main
On 13 July 2015 at 14:13, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
I think this, and blue motorways, is a good argument for why we need a
UK render of the map.
I agree a UK-specific rendering would be very useful, especially now
the Default style is getting less and less UK-centric.
--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 13 Jul 2015, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
On 13 July 2015 at 14:13, Philip Barnes p...@trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
I think this, and blue motorways,
I agree a UK-specific rendering would be very useful,
I fear that there is a risk the original
On Mon Jul 13 19:07:35 2015 GMT+0100, Dave F. wrote:
Curious: Why don't you think blue for motorways is acceptable?
Blue is the correct colour for motorways, I was referring to the coming carto
change where they will become orange.
Phil (trigpoint )
On 13/07/2015 13:13, Philip Barnes
The significant (and massive) disused railway viaduct near Thrapston:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/264894970
does not render on our default map:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/52.3914/-0.5433
despite being a significant and very visible landmark:
On 13 July 2015 at 09:53, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
I don't want fudge things to just tag for the renderer, but is there
a relevant tag missing, or should we change the rendering styles to
show such objects?
You might be interested in this PR which is currently under
24 matches
Mail list logo
