On 08-08-17 14:27, Jakka wrote:
> Do not quit understand.
> "man_made bridge 'under' a highway"
This was a cryptic way of explaining that highways that go over a bridge
are lying on top of the bridge sort of speak. you have to visualise it
like this to understand, but I missed the part where you mentioned the
existing way is really going underneath it, then of course, do not
connect at the edges.
> In this case the bridge, there was a railway on/over it and the highway
> passes under it. So there is nothing to connect at the edges.
yea, in your case the railway would have to be connected, but since it
doesn't seem to be there you cannot connect indeed. The idea is that
highway's with bridge tags area lying on top of the man_made=bridge
object. One would expect the renderer to represent this correctly, at
the moment it doesn't.
Here's an example :
here you can see Damstraat being drawn over the bridge, and it is realy
below it, also the cycleway is rendered incorrect on top of it.
realistically the bridge should cover the stuff below it but I think for
producing a decent map, an opaque solution would probably be appropriate
on the part where the road below crossed the bridge above.
what I'm saying is probably that this issue isn't limited to a bridge
that has nothing crossing it, it's also showing up where things do run
I assume the railroad is historic and has disappeared in the field, if
not, by all means: draw it. It represents reality.
But never map for the renderer, once the error is fixed there, it will
invalidate those solutions and you have to go in and fix it again, it's
better to leave accurate data intact and tackle the renderer issue.
> Op 8/08/2017 om 13:13 schreef Glenn Plas:
>> I have a few remarks on this, the biggest one is that we don't map for
>> the renderer... (hardly ever preferably).
>> The second one is that I think this solution is not the correct one, if
>> you put a man_made bridge 'under' a highway, you should connect the
>> bridge to the highway at the edges. add a node that connects both and
>> then rendering will be a lot better but not quite like you would expect.
>> transforming a bridge layout into a tunnel one isn't reflecting the real
>> This is something that should be fixed in the renderer, not in the data.
>> On 08-08-17 12:27, Jakka wrote:
>>> Determination: a bridge with nothing going over it anymore added as
>>> man_made=bridge and layer=1 is not rendered well.
>>> To counter it I made for the highway tunnel=yes layer=-1
>>> PS image on dropbox will not stay for ever....
>>> Talk-be mailing list
>> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be mailing list