gravitystorm / openstreetmap-carto

A general-purpose OpenStreetMap mapnik style, in CartoCSS
Other
1.54k stars 823 forks source link

Reviewing roads_info #5032

Open dch0ph opened 4 hours ago

dch0ph commented 4 hours ago

Picking up on one of the many topics raised in #5027 :

reviewing the roads_info table with the z-order values https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/4431 had added busway there - which might be a good idea to pre-emptively add in case we decide to render those in some form.

Adding a suitable slot for highway=busway would make sense, in (slightly) reducing the barrier to development. There was a promising start in #4226, and one point of apparent consensus was that rendering for highway=busway ought to be combined / visually coherent with highway=bus_guideway. I suspect it is a historical anachronism for guided busways to have their own layer (guideways). So would we want to create a slot for both and dump the separate guideways layer?

This connects to a more general question (triggered by #5021) of whether we have too many layers?

imagico commented 2 hours ago

I would not want to mix in the discussion on actually rendering highway=busway here - inclusion in the z_order definition does not prejudice that decision. #4952 opened options for rendering both implicitly and explicitly tagged bus only or bus priority roads - but that should be a separate discussion.

So would we want to create a slot for both and dump the separate guideways layer?

Fixing #3581 will require integrating highway=bus_guideway into the road layers.

This connects to a more general question (triggered by https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/5021) of whether we have too many layers?

The number of layers is not an issue per se. Separate layers are useful for modularization when

We should not just combine unrelated things into one layer just to keep the layer count low. There is very little benefit in that and making changes becomes more difficult.