* Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com [2010-06-18 14:19 -0700]:
yes it makes sense to support relations here. in general tags on relations
are used to push them onto all members. I think this is done already during
db import. mapnik will never see a relation itself.
Not exactly. osm2pgsql
On 16 Jun 2010, at 21:26 , Zeke Farwell wrote:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:03 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:
i think the rendered pseudo-shields probably need to show some reference to
the network
the highway is in, otherwise you'd not know what kind of shield you're
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:26 AM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.comwrote:
mentioned earlier already. the ref tag is taken by a standardization in osm
worldwide. sure osm is free and everyone is allowed to change things but
then don't expect to get any useful rendering anywhere. it
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 12:30 AM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
You know that nat and int are short for national and international, right?
Yup. If they are needed for something else then those tags can be avoided
and a new one could be created (us_ref?). It just seems better to
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Apollinaris Schoell
ascho...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you mind posting your standard for discussion and then we should
discuss and agree on something easy to map and easy to ise by rendering,
Garmin maps, other navi systems and update the wiki. Changing existing
On 6/16/10 1:35 PM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Apollinaris Schoell
ascho...@gmail.com wrote:
Do you mind posting your standard for discussion and then we should
discuss and agree on something easy to map and easy to ise by rendering,
Garmin maps, other
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.netwrote:
7 instead of US 7, NY 7, (7), etc.
Yes. Thank You. I've never liked putting network prefixes in the ref tag.
The reference number for United States Highway 7 is simply 7 not US 7.
No one calls it US 7 either.
On 6/16/10 11:51 PM, Zeke Farwell wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
mailto:rwe...@averillpark.net wrote:
7 instead of US 7, NY 7, (7), etc.
Yes. Thank You. I've never liked putting network prefixes in the ref
tag. The reference number for
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:26 AM, Zeke Farwell ezeki...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 12:03 AM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
wrote:
i think the rendered pseudo-shields probably need to show some reference
to the network
the highway is in, otherwise you'd not know what kind
I started experimenting with rendering route shields the other day, and I
figured it would be nice to use route relations as my source. The wiki
says that the ref= tag on a relation should not include the network
identifier[0], which makes sense, since there's a separate network tag.
When I
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
I started experimenting with rendering route shields the other day, and I
figured it would be nice to use route relations as my source. The wiki
says that the ref= tag on a relation should not include the network
(sorry about the dupe - forgot to reply to all)
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Apollinaris Schoell ascho...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
How consistent are the US route relations? Should the relations with
network information in the
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote:
I started experimenting with rendering route shields the other day, and I
figured it would be nice to use route relations as my source. The wiki
says that the ref= tag on a relation should not include the network
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 8:51 PM, David ``Smith'' vidthe...@gmail.com wrote:
In Ohio:
* Route relation tagging consistently is as described by the wiki
(with the exception of no clear agreement between network=US and
network=US:US)
* Interstate route relations offer nearly complete coverage
*
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 8:51 PM, David ``Smith'' vidthe...@gmail.com
wrote:
In Ohio:
* Route relation tagging consistently is as described by the wiki
(with the exception of no clear agreement between network=US
On Jun 15, 2010 9:02pm, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually all mainline (unbannered) US Route relations are complete
It's been a while since I've done a lot of route relation work, so I
haven't really seen the progress reports on the wiki. Plus, I think whoever
did much of
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 9:09 PM, vidthe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 15, 2010 9:02pm, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually all mainline (unbannered) U.S. Route relations are complete
It's been a while since I've done a lot of route relation work, so I haven't
really seen the
17 matches
Mail list logo
