On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 10:10 PM, Jon Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That is right. Looking from the outside these features may seem odd but > both were essential for the initial 0.5 multipolygon support. > > The multipolygons created with the 0.5 API had no defined roles so there > was no way to know which was the outer ring during the initial XML > processing. Hence the solution to aggregate the tags of all the > constituent ways. Since the rules defined the holes had to > counter-clockwise they could not be used for other areas to the tags > should never clashed.
Ah. The logical way seemed to me to be to only take the tags from the *outer* roles and ignore the tags on the inner roles. But if you during the transistion couldn't tell inner from outer then you have a problem. Seems to me to call for a process to examine all the multipolygon relations and assign inner/outer tags as appropriate... Then we can fix the renderers... Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://svana.org/kleptog/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
