W dniu 08.07.2014 20:04, yvecai napisał(a):
However, if rendering is an interesting topic, wiki is full of
rendering examples and advices that aren't followed anywhere. Let the
You don't even realize how sad is this observation for me...
What is the role of writing documentation than - and approving it or
declining? You can always use the tags as you like it, and they will be
rendered this way or another (or not a all), so why waste the time
proposing and documenting?
renderer render and the cartographer style the map, and trust them to
understand tags of interest to them.
You have no choice but to trust external rendering services - they will
do what they think is important anyway. And we show this trust by OSM
license.
But inside the project I think we need some more coherency. If there's
an approved proposal with rendering hints, at least the default render
should take it into account. Ideally I think all such features should be
rendered - and if not, the documentation should be revised by rendering
team explaining what is the problem. Eventually the consensus can be
reached. Otherwise, if OSM is basically the GIS database, why the main
project page has the map instead of big red "Download the data!" button?
In my case it was as simple as taking the template and filling it up.
"Rendering" section in this template (and the field in the proposition
infobox) means it's not unusual that the tagging can have rendering
implications. And I see the difference in scale of peaks type, which
should be properly visualised to not make default map cluttered with
unnecessary details (like
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/689 ). But I
just gave rough idea - the rendering team may feel some other settings
would be better.
--
Mambałaga
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
