On 31/05/2019 11:26, Paul Allen wrote:
Example of the horrors of using canal for a leat with current carto:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/609805692#map=16/52.0804/-4.6799
At z=19 it's actually close to the true width of the leat.
I suspect that the OSM Carto style would be open to pull requests that
looked at the sub-tags of canals etc. if it could be done in a way that
wasn't over-complicated - look at OSM Carto's handling of leaf type for
a possible way forward.
A bigger problem is the lack of granularity of rendering width at
various zoom levels (see for example
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/54.1856/-0.8334 ,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/54.1850/-0.8258 and compare with
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=14&lat=54.18504&lon=-0.80956
).
To cut the OSM Carto folks some slack, they're trying to implement a
global rendering style that has to cope with (in this case) all of the
different sorts of waterways everywhere on the planet. There are always
going to be places where a certain feature is densely mapped and where
it is important but isn't - look at the way that highway=footway becomes
essentially invisible at zoom levels where it would be really useful (in
rural areas) because it would overwhelm the map elsewhere (central
European cities). I'm sure that they'd be open to a pull request that
addressed the stream width issue above, but it'd need to be tested
elsewhere on the planet - and I'm sure that there are places where the
presence of a stream is "literally the most important thing on the map"
at z14.
I therefore wouldn't use OSM Carto as an example of "here's what you get
when you tag <feature> as X". Often there's a specialist map somewhere
designed to show <feature>, and that's probably the better option where
it exists.
Best Regards,
Andy
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
