On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 3:50 PM, John Smith <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 23 February 2010 06:41, Niklas Cholmkvist <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think it is because I like to map with much detail. I like to map it > > 'as it really is'. > > In reality you are only mapping an approximation, maps aren't supposed > to replace aerial imagery they serve different purposes. > > > That is not the only reason. Maybe it's how the map looks also in > > various renderers(mapnik or other renderers), which shows the streets as > > very big while in reality they are pretty small if seen from a long > > You will end up breaking routing etc if you don't also include a way, > or have very very strange round about like routing which will depart > greatly from your goal of mapping in detail as much as possible. > > > With traditional GIS, municipalities will often have both street centerlines and street polygons, with centerlines useful for routing and such purposes while polygons give level of detail desired for planning, engineering purposes, etc. I also see this done with hydrography (streams & rivers). If OSM had street polygons in addition to lines, that would be fine, but not instead of lines. If both were mapped, is there a tag to tell Mapnik not to render the centerline? In the future, it would be neat for routing to work with polygons, especially for pedestrian routing (e.g. across plazas and open space). -Katie _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- Katie Filbert @filbertkm
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
