-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 819
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Rendering natural=bare_rock earlier #2852
Conversation
landcover.mss
Outdated
[zoom >= 13] { | ||
polygon-pattern-file: url('symbols/rock_overlay.png'); | ||
[way_pixels >= 4] { polygon-pattern-gamma: 0.75; } | ||
[way_pixels >= 64] { polygon-pattern-gamma: 0.3; } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We still need these two lines.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure if the size is a good reason to render it earlier. A small forest might be more interesting than a huge basalt plateau.
But in general I'd like to render landuse earlier so 'approve' from my side (assuming you fix the polygon-pattern-gamma).
Fixed, thanks for spotting!
IMO general map is for explaining the space - if there is something big and characteristic, it's more interesting than just "a land" (whatever it is - a forest, a water reservoir, a basalt or a sand). We don't claim some continents are interesting/boring just because some things are more (or less) popular than on the other ones. We just show what is here - like the ice on Antarctica. |
sent from a phone
On 19. Sep 2017, at 22:29, Matthijs Melissen ***@***.***> wrote:
I'm not sure if the size is a good reason to render it earlier. A small forest might be more interesting than a huge basalt plateau.
+1, think extremes like the Sahara desert: we'd display sand areas very early and the most interesting places (oasis) only after you'd have zoomed in a lot.
Size is working well for some things, e.g. buildings, but generally it is more important what something is, than how big it is. Barren land is more the absence of a feature (vegetation) than it is a feature itself.
|
This is an information what this area is and it tells a lot of this place. But if we have some rendering for oasis (a transportation-blue/amenity-brown palm icon?), we can just start showing it early too, because it's POI and it should not interfere with any other environment. Think of a picnic table in the forest. Table is POI, but it's good to know it's located in the forest, not just "on a land". BTW: natural=oasis has just 109 instances and no wiki page, so we should probably wait until it gains some popularity, but then we can render them even from z8 if it makes sense. |
sent from a phone
On 20. Sep 2017, at 00:05, kocio-pl ***@***.***> wrote:
But if we have some rendering for oasis (a transportation-blue/amenity-brown palm icon?), we can just start showing it early too
AFAIK we don't even have a documented tag for them (there's a mention of natural=oasis in an abandoned desert proposal though. The tag has currently 109 uses).
Cheers,
Martin
|
The testing area has been retagged since then, but it seems to be useful area type (complementary to ice) on Antarctica, like here: |
The area of a bare rock can be substantial - and lack of overlay pattern doesn't help to recognize what it is.
Area in Libya
z8
Before
After
z9
Before
After