On 7 September 2013 14:36, <les...@lsces.co.uk> wrote: > Sent from my android device so the quoting is crapp! > > > -----Original Message----- > From: OpenStreetmap HADW <osmh...@gmail.com> > To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org > Sent: Sat, 07 Sep 2013 13:44 > Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Urban Mixed Access Ways and Barriers (restricted to > motor vehicles, open to foot) > > On 7 September 2013 12:15, SomeoneElse <li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk> wrote:
> > Then it is up to the rederers to make any simplificatons needed In practice, there is only one renderer for general users, and my impression is that that doesn't have that much deep understanding, so relies on conventional mapping abstractions and a lot of user provided rules. Although technical users may use special renderers for special tasks, to be generally useful, the map has to provide as much useful information to the user as possible using a relatively simple minded renderer. (I did actually chance on a paper discussion how Mapnik's placing and selection of labels is far from ideal, which is probably one of the more difficult things that it actually tries to do.) The maps also have to work with mappers who don't understand the difference between the rendered map and the internal representation, so will not provide the rich metadata needed for an intelligent renderer (as mentioned on another thread, they will load the map with footpaths and car parks, but not add the access=* tags needed to distinguish between those that can and cannot be used). If a render tries to get too clever on data that doesn't have consistent and rich meta-data, it is likely to guess wrong and introduce artefacts as a result. That's OK if the result will be cleaned up by a human, the machines will have done a lot of let work, but that is not the case here. _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
