render military areas and prisons on top of buildings and roads

[kocio-pl]

We have inconsistent hatching rules for amenity=prison and landuse=military (I don't know if there are some other hatched objects right now): one is rendered as the lower layer than buildings, grass and parking, while the other is rendered above all these elements, but - as far as I can see - below the highways.

See the example here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.20806/21.01130

Do we want to have general rules for layering hatchings (I guess we do) and how should they be defined - or maybe we want to express something by using different patterns?

[matthijsmelissen]

Do we want to have general rules for layering hatchings (I guess we do) and how should they be defined - or maybe we want to express something by using different patterns?

We don't, and we should :)

[kocio-pl]

I meant "we do want to". =}

One more, but so basic thing, that I have even not checked - the geometry (hatching density and angle) is different...

[polarbearing]

The angle is intentional, it is vertical on the prison (symbolising the bars), and 45 deg on the military. Please consider the optical illusion from the oblique buildings in your example if you don't see it vertical.

The density is 3px line in a 16x16 png, both in the vertical and the 45 deg version, the perceived difference comes from the different angle.

[kocio-pl]

You are probably right about all those optical effects, however I'm skeptic if we want such distinction at all - I think the color+icon tandem is enough. In my view "cool" symbolism was taken not considering consistency of hatched areas.

Nevertheless there's still the problem of layering - key options are:

1. Hatching above all the objects
2. Hatching beneath all the objects

On military area we have probably 1a - hatching above most objects except highways. Now we need to decide (and justify it somehow). I would say 1. is preferable to me.

[pnorman]

I need to add another landcover overlay for #1242 that lies above landcover but below buildings

[matkoniecz]

see also http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=50.08134&mlon=19.89985#map=17/50.08134/19.89985

[kocio-pl]

@pnorman

I need to add another landcover overlay for #1242 that lies above landcover but below buildings

This issue is closed now - do you still plan to do it?

[Tomasz-W]

@jragusa Can you make a PR similar to #3469 for amenity=prison overlay? There is also sill a problem with platform areas: #1285 (comment)

[jragusa]

@Tomasz-W yes I will take a look this week

[jragusa]

1 month later...
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/202172020
before

after

I moved the layer id: landuse-overlay after id: nature-reserve-boundaries

[polarbearing]

I'm not sure that is an improvement. I remember it was a conscious decision a while ago to keep the roads above the hatching and the outline.

• the privacy of the road is marked with dashes, that interferes now with the hatching
• the boundary appears like a barrier on the road, a good example is the west entrance above, which can be accessed from the public road, while the gate is behind the parking.

[Adamant36]

Can the outline be gotten rid of or is it necessary for the hatching or something? That might be one solution. I know it makes it easier to make out the area at higher zoom levels, but the hatching and color might be enough on its own. Especially if similar colors like retail are moved away from having red tints.

[jragusa]

I realise that I need to resolve firstly this issue before to work on #688, otherwise buildings will also appear over landuse-overlay.

[polarbearing]

Can the outline be gotten rid of or is it necessary for the hatching or something?

The outline is probably independent of the hatching. But we are looking for more potential outlines, see #3045, thus the problem should be addressed. I'd assume roads are rendered relatively late, so it should not be too difficult to get the outline under it.

It might help to clarify in what order things are desired to render here.

[Tomasz-W]

I would render outlines over highways to make them constant and alle readable. Overlay should be an overlay.

Examples of outlines "broken" by highways above:
https://www.openstreetmap.org//#map=19/52.40036/16.99424
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.25432/21.02380

[polarbearing]

Rendering tourism outlines earlier was a concious decision in #3037 to solve the problem that the outline was hiding linear barriers. It was discussed at that stage that highways should paint over the outline.
The examples above are fine for me, no need to change. As there are no barriers mapped, apparently there is a wide pedestrian way across the boundary into the tourism area, so map painting and reality would match perfectly.
The current rendering order makes a gate on the crossing point of boundary and road well visible. Having the dark outline above the road makes them hard to see.

In the examples there are also several mapping errors, e.g. a toll booth at the zoo entrance (n261283122), or missing gates (it makes no sense to have one gate in the middle and free entrance left and right)