Hi,
some time ago, I discused with Kay ( http://parking.openstreetmap.de/ ) that it would be nice to have some kind of rendered base layer without streets. That would give the overlay-creators much more flexibility to design maps.
Right now, it is for example impossible to un-highlight the prominent rendering of motorways which are less important for bicycle maps.
We did not yet discuss which elements should always be rendered, but I think for a start that would be landuse=, natural=, building=...
Any coments, why that would be a good/bad idea? :)
Regards, Thomas
Am 19.07.2010 16:13, schrieb Thomas Ineichen:
Hi,
some time ago, I discused with Kay ( http://parking.openstreetmap.de/ ) that it would be nice to have some kind of rendered base layer without streets. That would give the overlay-creators much more flexibility to design maps.
What kind of overlays are you talking about? Vector overlays or Mapnik-Styles? In the latter case there is no need as we need a custom style either. In the case of a Vector-Style I'm not sure if rendering streets via Vector-Layer would work but in any case I'd give it a try.
Peter
Hi Peter,
What kind of overlays are you talking about? Vector overlays or Mapnik-Styles? In the latter case there is no need as we need a custom style either. In the case of a Vector-Style I'm not sure if rendering streets via Vector-Layer would work but in any case I'd give it a try.
I thought more of mapnik-styles...
Mmmh.. as you can import style-files into another, maybe I'll try to separate osm.xml into landuse.xml, natural.xml, railway.xml, etc. So if one wants his own street-rendering, one can simply include the above xml..
Regards, Thomas
Am 21.07.2010 21:07, schrieb Thomas Ineichen:
Mmmh.. as you can import style-files into another, maybe I'll try to separate osm.xml into landuse.xml, natural.xml, railway.xml, etc.
This has already been done a little by seperation things into the layer-*.inc files, but this work is not completed. It would be great to complete it.
Peter
Hi Peter,
Am 21.07.2010 21:07, schrieb Thomas Ineichen:
Mmmh.. as you can import style-files into another, maybe I'll try to separate osm.xml into landuse.xml, natural.xml, railway.xml, etc.
This has already been done a little by seperation things into the layer-*.inc files, but this work is not completed. It would be great to complete it.
Oh, I should look more into the inc-folder before posting.. :) I'll check what's left to do.
Regards, Thomas
Hi,
nice to have some kind of rendered base layer without streets.
Yes, and we could have e.g. 2 layers only with streets:
1) "normal" street rendering like currently in mapnik 2) "physical" street rendering, based mainly on surface tags (this could be identical with the "bicycle map", if used with another transparent layer with bike routes)
We did not yet discuss which elements should always be rendered, but I think for a start that would be landuse=, natural=, building=...
That's what I am currently rendering in another project as well. "Just add water" -erm- I mean: just add waterway=
I would refrain from rendering additional info in a base layer, e.g. omit things like shops, housenumbers, post_boxes as these can be overlays.
In addition, I propose to supply for a coloured as well as a black- and-white base layer. I found it is very handy if you present various non-topological information, like coloured parking lanes, and the colour information stays out from the map.
Thomas you can also try to use b/w tiles http://toolserver.org/tiles/parking-bw/17/68646/45898.png as a base layer for your disabled map and see how it looks. (But as I look, I see that the parking map has too many things in it to really deserve the name "base map", and some coloured too)
Greetings from Würzburg, Kay
On 19-7-2010 16:13, Thomas Ineichen wrote:
Any coments, why that would be a good/bad idea? :)
http://www.openfietskaart.nl/?zoom=10&lat=52.15952&lon=6.02828&l... ?
http://www.openfietskaart.nl/?zoom=10&lat=52.15952&lon=6.02828&l...
You mean something like this?
One thing that is always an issue in these split setups, is object placement. By that I mean that when you render a map in one go, the renderer can avoid placing objects on top of each other. That will not work when you split layers off into separate maps.
Hi,
http://www.openfietskaart.nl/?zoom=10&lat=52.15952&lon=6.02828&l...
Good example.
object placement. [...] avoid placing objects on top of each other.
Exactly that can (of course not for all purposes) be an advantage instead of a disadvantage. In mapnik, often information is simply omitted due to overlap avoidance. This is bad if I am interested in a special topic:
If I am interested in parking, I don't want that a parking garage is left out because there's a nail polish shop in the first floor of the same building.
Of course it would be good if the user could sort and stack the layers according to her priorities.
Kay