On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Andre Hinrichs <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm working on the oceantiles for three weeks now changing over 2200 tile > definitions and am getting more and more frustrated. The decision about > whether a tile is sea/land/mixed is sometimes very hard and often vague. I've > seen cases where the coastline is about 0.5 meters away or within a tile. So > the next time somebody is moving a single node there may harm the tile > rendering.
It's a terrible solution, but we havn't got any better ones yet. FWIW the oceantiles.dat should be directly generatable from the coastline checker (http://tile.openstreetmap.nl/coastlines.html) but no-one has taken the effort. Might be less work than changing them all by hand. > I was thinking a lot about this and already dreamed of it... I cannot see the > necessarity for a 'mixed' state. The oceantiles.dat should give the server > the possibility to serve a colored image where no tile information is present > and the renderer should only upload an empty tile if it really cannot decide > whether there is land or sea. The renderer should only take the state of the > tile as background color if there is no coastline or water or land in the > rendered OSM data. Wherever the renderer is able to decide this on basis of > the OSM data it should do so where the oceantiles.dat is not necessary for, > is it? You're right, it should be able to but it doesn't. It's a but which I didn't know about when I made the first version of coastlines.dat. close-areas is only able to determine if a continuous piece of coastline *intersects* the edges. This is messy and unneccesary. Definitly some I want to fix at some point (if someone doesn't beat me to it). Mvg, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <[email protected]> http://svana.org/kleptog/ _______________________________________________ Tilesathome mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tilesathome
