Opened 9 years ago

Closed 9 years ago

Last modified 9 years ago

#1514 closed defect (wontfix)

Mapnik renders names for some items that otherwise aren't rendered

Reported by: SomeoneElse Owned by: steve8@…
Priority: minor Milestone:
Component: mapnik Version:
Keywords: Cc:

Description

An example is the dismantled railway here:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=53.1788&lon=-1.3573&zoom=17&layers=B000FTF

This is a stretch of former railway where there's no trace left on the ground. It's set as "railway=dismantled" (I changed this stretch some time ago from "railway=abandoned" precisely because there is no trace left on the ground). The railway doesn't show, but the name does. Would it be possible for Mapnik to only render the name of a way if there is a renderable tag on the way?

Change History (3)

comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by SomeoneElse

Another effect that might be related can be seen here:

http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.956849&lon=-1.147037&zoom=18&layers=B000FTF

Here there's a named abandoned railway the name for which is displayed over the top of the shopping centre that now lives on the site. The shopping centre is named, but the name doesn't appear.

In this case the railway is surely mistagged, but that's another issue.

comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by steve8@…

  • Resolution set to wontfix
  • Status changed from new to closed

I am afraid I don't know how to filter for "only put a name there if it is a renderable tag", except by adding "and not railway=dismantled". At moment is a generic filter that puts those particular names in. In my opinion if nothing is visible on the ground (ie dismantled) it should not render (it doesn't) nor be named. Suggest that the name be put in a "note" tag so it is recorded, but not rendered - which I have done for a stretch of that line. It seems that some of it is tagged dismantled and some abandoned. Is that correct - as the abandoned implies visible signs and thus renders? The Nottingham Centre one prob should all be changed to dismantled but I don't have the knowledge to do that (and names moved to notes). I think it is tagging not rendering issue so am closing this.

comment:3 Changed 9 years ago by SomeoneElse

I'd agree that a "note" (or probably better a "description") is at least as good as a "name" for features that simply aren't there any more (which is the case with "railway=dismantled").

I'd not removed names previously because I didn't add the railways concerned and didn't know what whoever had added them was using them for, but since then it's become clear that wherever they were imported from wasn't tremendously accurate and in some cases (way 23345642 is an example) a figment of someone's imagination - seeing things in the landscape that aren't, and never have been, there.

I'll make sure that any that I see in future that really aren't there any more aren't labelled to cause a "floating name".

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.