New path rendering #1359
New path rendering #1359
Conversation
|
I'm on two minds about this change. I think visually the new style is much prettier. The main risk is that footpaths are now much harder to distinguish from other types of roads, such as service roads. What do @gravitystorm and @pnorman think? |
|
I haven't loaded up and looked around locally yet, but will do so. |
I think in a micro- scale it would probably make sense! The service roads and the footpaths (for both of which this scale is the most common one) are not totally exclusive - their space is shared by different uses:
So this is closer to the "ground truth" than we expected... =} |
That's also my only point of criticism. The new style looks pretty but makes it hard to distinguish footways from roads. Can you try to draw them slightly thinner? |
|
perhaps we can remove the chasing to be able to have it thinner. This could be a visual difference to roads. Not sure if this will work |
| @@ -1400,7 +1443,7 @@ residential is rendered from z10 and is not included in osm_planet_roads. */ | |||
| [zoom >= 15] { line/line-width: @path-width-z15; } | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
|
The casing for paths on z16 seems a bit strong. z15 on forests seems weak I find it jarring next to paths In isolation I think the changes are mostly okay, but when combined with our path and track rendering, I'm not so sure that it fits in. |
|
@pnorman I think that this is not as bad as it seemed:
|
|
Oh, it's just been pulled... How about exchanging the colour of living_street (dark gray) and pedestrian ways (light gray), would that make pedestrian areas too dark? If not, footways could be dark gray like the new pedestrian ways, which would make them more visible against vegetation and residential areas. It would also make sense for drivers: anything dark gray (pedestrian ways and footways) would not be driveable. Living streets, which are driveable, would look more similar to residential ways, which are also driveable. Dark gray would make footways remarkably different from service ways. |
|
I was experimenting with it and main problem was that it still seemed to be too close to roads. In my tests most people claimed that it looks better but dotted pattern is more footway-like and less road-like. Dark grey footways were hard to notice in forests and too close to barrier=*, lighter ones keep disappearing on residential areas. Also, grey pedestrian areas are problematic. It is either too close to white (roads), grey (of residential areas), brown (of buildings) or really dark. https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/899988/8439956/83260edc-1f6f-11e5-9917-8e09496c162a.png I have one version that is quite promising - what is quite interesting started as a joke, so many promising ideas failed, lets try something absurd. To my surprise in tests it had really good opinions among most people. But it requires change of landuse=railway/industrial colors, I am currently tweaking this part. https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/899988/8440300/915c6d32-1f71-11e5-9356-a4f6c2817cd8.png |
|
Your changes look very intuitive to me, really! Railway and industrial areas kind of remind me of highways, so how about changing the colour hue to a little bit closer to orange? Not too much in order to avoid confusion with farms (unless their colour is to a little bit closer to green). Another way to increase contrast with purple might be to make these red areas a little bit grayer. |
|
Moving industrial/railway landuse to Lch(89,9,104) nicely solves conflict with new footways - but it is closer than before to residential, garages and school landcover.
https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/899988/8442254/2ec4ad8a-1f7e-11e5-8731-41c9adc36743.png (railway, residential, garages) |
|
School may be less of a problem since it looks like we may end up with dropping filling color for educational areas (boundary color will take over). Residential is sufficiently different on this example for me, so the garages are the only one left - but they are much less important, so we may change them too. However your second example was not uploaded properly, so I can't tell for sure (I guess there was landuse=garages probably?). |
|
Unfortunately there is no consensus that either this version or versions based on that idea are superior to current footway rendering... Therefore this PR will not be merged - but thanks for idea and code! I really like this rendering - but unfortunately... |
(See #1327 for old discussion. Unfortunately something went wrong while rebasing and I had to do a new pull request)
I've recently seen a lot of issues regarding cycleways, footways and stairs, so I thought what about a complete new rendering for paths similar to the German OSM Style.
This pull requests changes the following:
Paved paths are rendered same as footwaysThis solves the following issues:
Some possible issues with this style:
Before and after renderings:
Low zoom levels:
forest:
Cemetery and allotments:
Higher zoom levels:
