Martin I would be possible to do this, yes. But what is the point of having two map renderers if they both produce identical output?
In general the Mapnik rendering is more conventional, whereas the t...@hrendering provides more opportunities for experimentation and innovation. One of the innovations with the current t...@h configuration, which is particularly interesting for the OSM project, is that the very low zooms, like here http://www.informationfreeway.org/?lat=37.422865778883406&lon=53.13083873035404&zoom=3&layers=B0000F000Fshow the road mapping density very well. Compare that with the same zoom level on Mapnik or Google to understand the difference. This view is very useful for demonstrating the true coverage of OSM. And that is an important thing to be able to do. Low zoom levels are generated by starting with a captionless set of z12 tiles and combining them with a different caption set at each level. If landuse were to be rendered at z11 then this would have an effect on lower zoom levels. In particular it would drown out the detail of the road network and many areas would just be a grey-green blur. It would be possible to achieve what you want if another variant of the z12 tiles was generated that included landuse. This landuse tileset could then be used for z11 and maybe z10 and then use the non-landuse tileset for z9 and lower. That way, some of the lower zoom levels could have landuse and the very low zoom levels would remain the same. There would be some additional processing and storage overhead as there would be three versions of each z12 tile, but maybe that would not be too bad. Perhaps Sebastian can comment about the likely performance and space impact. 80n On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected] > wrote: > 2009/12/22 Norbert Hoffmann <[email protected]> > > If you want to add landuse >> to the shown items, you would have to remove something else if you don't >> want to clutter the map (your example looks nice because nearly all >> streets >> are not shown). >> > > I expected somehow answers like this, but I believe that these issues > (cluttering) could be handled by choosing appropriate colours (and very > important: layering order). Sorry for this, but: if it was _impossible_, why > does it work here: > > http://maps.google.de/maps?hl=de&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Rom,+Latium,+Italien&ll=49.908787,9.975586&spn=5.002496,9.876709&z=7 > > I don't say we should copy big G, but I think we are actually cluttering > our maps in lowzooms completely: > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.34&lon=9.09&zoom=7&layers=0B00FTF > > This for several reasons but IMHO mainly because at this scale there should > be a focus on motorways and motorroads (beeing rendered bolder than they are > right now) while primary, sec and tert could remain the same or become even > finer lines. > > Whether or not there is a forest polygon underneath them will IMHO not > change readability at those zoom levels. > > Mapnik shows landuses down to z9(?). You'll see, that there are some areas >> (esp. where landuse imports have been dome in the US) where you begin to >> loose the structure given by the grid of streets. >> > > compare to Google Z.7: it is mainly a problem of optimizing line width and > colours... > > On the other hand (and ignoring implications of the project name): this > gets into an ideologic discussion whether streets or forests structure the > planet ;-), IMHO at planet scale forests are more important than streets. > > >> Norbert (proposes to delete the line types of waterways at z12captionless. >> "Rivers that need to be seen at lowzoom are already mapped as areas".) >> > > This is another issue and might be dependant on the area you are mapping: I > doubt we have all larger siberian (to give an example) rivers mapped as > areas, but I guess we do have in Germany. The benefit would be faster > rendering, but is this improving the situation? Some years ago I was told > that the bottleneck for t...@h is not the rendering but the server that has > to load the rendered tiles from the clients. Is this still the case, or did > the server-upgrade change the situation? > > cheers, > Martin > > _______________________________________________ > Tilesathome mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tilesathome > >
_______________________________________________ Tilesathome mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tilesathome
