André Pirard wrote:
On 2014-05-19 18:35, SomeoneElse wrote :
If you feel strongly about it why not knock up a rendering with more
differentiation between track and path and invite people to compare
with the current standard map?
¿¿¿ ¡¡¡ That is exactly what I did with showing OSM and IGN
(SomeoneElse's ;-)) maps side by side !!! ???
No other map would think of not differentiating better those two ways
and all the similar cases.
Sorry, I should have been clearer - I meant "a modification to the
existing osm-carto style that makes the difference clearer" The IGN map
doesn't differentiate between paths and tracks by colour, but by an
extra-long dash, something that I don't think that osm-carto uses (but
there's no technical reason why it couldn't). The advantage to seeing
this on a web-based slippy map compared to a picture in a list message
is that it allows you to move to features that you're familiar with, and
compare the map with your mental picture.
For example, when the cycle.travel maps appeared, some routes near me
looked "obviously wrong". This turned out to be a "tracktype"
mistagging problem rather than a rendering one, but it had been there
for a while because it just wasn't obvious on other renderings, and
wouldn't be obvious to anyone not familiar with the routes concerned.
Cheers,
Andy
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
