Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1?

On Monday, December 17, 2012, Clay Smalley wrote: > > (Of course, some of these lines run through tunnels where they are tagged > layer=-1, and on bridges where they are tagged layer=1 correctly. The layer > tag on these bits of track would remain untouched.) > > Though this layer tag is unnecessar

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1?

2012/12/17 Paul Johnson : > On Monday, December 17, 2012, Clay Smalley wrote: >> >> (Of course, some of these lines run through tunnels where they are tagged >> layer=-1, and on bridges where they are tagged layer=1 correctly. The layer >> tag on these bits of track would remain untouched.) >> > >

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1?

Well, I say this because I've yet to come across any renderer that doesn't automatically assume layer=-1 for tunnel or layer=1 for bridge when it's omitted. On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2012/12/17 Paul Johnson : > > On Monday, December 17, 2012, Clay Smalley wro

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1?

2012/12/17 Paul Johnson : > Well, I say this because I've yet to come across any renderer that doesn't > automatically assume layer=-1 for tunnel or layer=1 for bridge when it's > omitted. I am refering to this proposal, which was rejected: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/def

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1?

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Clay Smalley wrote: > I noticed the majority of the trackage of the San Francisco Muni lines are > tagged as layer=1, while the streets along which they run have no layer tag > (an implied layer=0). > If the Muni lines are layer=1, it is my understanding that the

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1? and general tagging levels considerations

On 2012-12-17 07:50, Clay Smalley wrote : I noticed the majority of the trackage of the San Francisco Muni lines are tagged as layer=1, while the streets along which they run have no layer tag (an implied layer=0). If the Muni lines are layer=1, it is my

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1?

On Monday 17 December 2012 18:13:37 Clay Smalley wrote: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Clay Smalley wrote: > > I noticed the majority of the trackage of the San Francisco Muni lines > > are tagged as layer=1, while the streets along which they run have no > > layer tag (an implied layer=0). >

Re: [Tagging] place=neighbourhood

On 2012-12-17 08:57, Michael Krämer wrote : Hi, 2012/12/17 A.Pirard.Papou > Have I, or rather JOSM, done anything wrong? I don't think so, I think the problem is on OSMI's side. "place=neighbourhood" is a somewhat recent addition so it might not be in O

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1?

On 17/12/12 06:50, Clay Smalley wrote: I noticed the majority of the trackage of the San Francisco Muni lines are tagged as layer=1, while the streets along which they run have no layer tag (an implied layer=0). If the Muni lines are layer=1, it is my understanding that the Muni lines should be

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1? and general tagging levels considerations

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:40 AM, A.Pirard.Papou wrote: > > A level is an altitude. A layer is a drawing opacity. Although OSM does > not tag for the renderer, it uses the tag *layer=**. It defines *layer*as the > relative "position" (is that "altitude"?). In fact, the only effect > of assignin

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1?

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Chris Hill wrote: > The layer tag is only a hint to renderers. If you remove the tag the road > way may render over the rail way and hide it. Yes, that's been my understanding. It's also been my understanding that we have a separate renderer for public transit.

[Tagging] How to map an artificial ground wall?

Hi all, I'm remapping the Bois helicopter field (http://osm.org/go/0CG5O3888--), and I don't know how to map the surrounding artificial ground walls, which can be seen for instance here: http://rocknrollcircuschx.free.f

Re: [Tagging] How to map an artificial ground wall?

Looks like a barrier=embankment to me. Graham. On 17 December 2012 19:36, Enrico Mattea wrote: > Hi all, > I'm remapping the Bois helicopter field > (http://osm.org/go/0CG5O3888--), > and I don't know how to map the su

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1?

Though in this case, the rail way should be on the track centerline, which probably doesn't overlap the road centerline. On Dec 17, 2012 12:25 PM, "Chris Hill" wrote: > On 17/12/12 06:50, Clay Smalley wrote: > >> I noticed the majority of the trackage of the San Francisco Muni lines >> are tagged

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1?

2012/12/17 Chris Hill : > The layer tag is only a hint to renderers. If you remove the tag the road > way may render over the rail way and hide it. no it is not (only, IMHO), it is an attribute to get some depth into a 2D-model (our database). It is a tag that indicates which object lies above wh

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1? and general tagging levels considerations

2012/12/17 A.Pirard.Papou > A level is an altitude. A layer is a drawing opacity. Although OSM > does not tag for the renderer, it uses the tag *layer=**. It defines * > layer* as the relative "position" (is that "altitude"?) > no, it is not altitude (height over ground), it is the relative

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1? and general tagging levels considerations

On 2012-12-17 22:16, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote : 2012/12/17 A.Pirard.Papou > A level is an altitude. A layer is a drawing opacity. Although OSM does not tag for the renderer, it uses the tag *layer=**. It defines *layer* as the relative "position" (i

Re: [Tagging] SF Muni tram lines are layer=1? and general tagging levels considerations

Am 18.12.2012 07:31, schrieb A.Pirard.Papou: On 2012-12-17 22:16, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote : 2012/12/17 A.Pirard.Papou > We badly need precision. . In fact, the only effect of assigning a layer is that upper layer objects hide lower layer ones (it's no