I was really pleased they were *removed* from the general-purpose maps. They could be rendered on a specialist railway or historic map, but why show things that are barely discernible on the main maps?
What else is new? The buildings have a different shade. Or have a different color altogether (from chocolate-ish brown to something close to a mixture of gray, brown and black).
I'm kind of in agreement with chillly on this one in that I don't really see the point of *abandoned* lines being rendered on the main map (even though I have traced loads myself). However I am pleased that *disused* railway lines are being rendered again because they are usually still clearly visible landmarks/features.
dysteleologist: What is really needed is a visibility tag or some way to say this disused or abandoned line is here and we can / can't see it. Only render it if it is visible. Some old lines have been traced from out-of-copyright maps with no regard to whether they are actually still visible on the ground. There's nothing wrong with them being in the database (they could be rendered on other maps such as a railway map) but only render what we can see today on Mapnik. Abandoned lines that become, say, cycleways just get rendered as a cycleway - that fine, they are a cycleway now.
Its a bit like plotting old Roman roads. They only make sense if being put into perspective with existing roads. After all, OSM has the power to record what little is left of history.
I too agree with chilly. Where the abandoned railway has been replaced by a road, the rendering is really busy and would leave a casual user of the map confused, e.g., here:
OpenStreetMap
Discussion
Kommentaar van chillly op 6 November 2009 om 11:14
I was really pleased they were *removed* from the general-purpose maps. They could be rendered on a specialist railway or historic map, but why show things that are barely discernible on the main maps?
This is a backward step.
Kommentaar van ianlopez1115 op 6 November 2009 om 13:33
What else is new? The buildings have a different shade. Or have a different color altogether (from chocolate-ish brown to something close to a mixture of gray, brown and black).
Kommentaar van dysteleologist op 6 November 2009 om 14:51
I'm kind of in agreement with chillly on this one in that I don't really see the point of *abandoned* lines being rendered on the main map (even though I have traced loads myself). However I am pleased that *disused* railway lines are being rendered again because they are usually still clearly visible landmarks/features.
Kommentaar van chillly op 6 November 2009 om 15:49
dysteleologist: What is really needed is a visibility tag or some way to say this disused or abandoned line is here and we can / can't see it. Only render it if it is visible. Some old lines have been traced from out-of-copyright maps with no regard to whether they are actually still visible on the ground. There's nothing wrong with them being in the database (they could be rendered on other maps such as a railway map) but only render what we can see today on Mapnik. Abandoned lines that become, say, cycleways just get rendered as a cycleway - that fine, they are a cycleway now.
Kommentaar van wilda69 op 6 November 2009 om 19:07
Its a bit like plotting old Roman roads. They only make sense if being put into perspective with existing roads. After all, OSM has the power to record what little is left of history.
Kommentaar van davespod op 7 November 2009 om 14:17
I too agree with chilly. Where the abandoned railway has been replaced by a road, the rendering is really busy and would leave a casual user of the map confused, e.g., here:
osm.org/?lat=53.39693&lon=-2.35824&zoom=16&layers=B000FTF