On Feb 8, 2008 11:39 AM, David Groom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The main problem area seems to be that some people do not like the current > proposal whereby a river is divided up in to separate closed areas. The > reason being that the "segment" crossing the river to close the area marks a > boundary which does not actually exist. Discussion on this could go on > indefinitely, but it does really need a Mapnik "expert" to either (i) see if > there is a way that Mapnik can render areas which are not closed (ie. > comprised of two parallel ways), or (ii) if this is not , and will never be, > possible then to state that fact , and we can then have a tag proposal which > will render in both Mapnik and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sure, the same way as coastlines. The question really becomes do we just want to make waterway=river work the same as coastlines. Mapnik can't render incomplete polygons the way you want to, and for that matter neither can osmarender. You get something that vaguely resembles the end result but in general it won't work. *Except* for coastlines, where there is a seperate process that handles them, for both osmarender and mapnik. > The main issue in practice is we now have no standard way of tagging rivers, > and people are relatively free to do what they like, with the result that > large portions of the River Thames disappeared from the Mapnik layer > recently > http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=51.49&lon=0.41&zoom=11&layers=0000F0B0F The rules are fairly simple: all areas must be closed, except for coastlines. People may not like the results, but it's what works right now. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://svana.org/kleptog/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
