It's a rendering matter... looking a bit "flashy" with pink in private alleys and green dots for trees.
Switch to MapQuest layer, you'll have another less flashy render: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.91503&lon=174.77973&zoom=16&layers=<http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.91503&lon=174.77973&zoom=16&layers=M> Q 2012/11/21 Greg Troxel <[email protected]> > > Robin Paulson <[email protected]> writes: > > > i've done some quite detailed editing near where i live, i'd > > appreciate anyone who is interested taking a look and responding. > > > > i'm not sure what to make of the result. for one, my partner, a > > non-mapper, has told me she finds it very confusing, which potentially > > raises questions > > > > > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.91503&lon=174.77973&zoom=16&layers=M > > I think it's important to separate what should be in the database vs > what should be rendered. > > I find the rendering symbol for access=private ways to be unpleasing, > because they have more visual weight than accessible ways. I'd rather > see them kind of greyed out. I also think the 'access denied' coloring > is in appropriate for ways that people wouldn't expect to be able to > use, as opposed to ways where such rendering (to make the tagging known) > has more communicative value. As always, I like to go back to the USGS > topo maps; there driveways are thin lines without any 'danger stay out' > hints. > > The fences are confusing because people are used to seeing lot lines, > and fences look almost like lot lines, but not quite. And because > fences look like lines that perhaps driveways should look like. Again, > a rendering issue as the default style is extended to show more > elements, and I think it really points out that one size fits all for > rendering can't be pleasing to everyone. > > I'm not sure what I think of the tree dots. Again going back to USGS > topo maps, I find it nice to know wooded (green tint) vs open (white > background) areas. This has to me far more information transfer than > tree dots. But I think it's good that the trees are in the db. > > Finally, I get the impression (didn't look at imagery) that buildings > are less complete than fences. That may contribute to the confusion. > > As a rendering nit, I find that the no-acess tint on the driveways > extends into the middle of the navigable road, and that feels wrong, but > I don't know how hard it is to fix. > > I would encourage you to set up your own rendering stack and play with > alternatives. I haven't done that, but it's on my todo list. > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > -- Christian Quest - OpenStreetMap France - http://openstreetmap.fr/u/cquest<http://openstreetmap.fr/u/christian-quest>
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
