On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Tobias Knerr <o...@tobias-knerr.de> wrote:
> Right now, we already have to distinguish three types of tags: > * always area > * always way > * way unless area=yes is present. > > I simply do not think that the possibility to decrease of the number of > tags is worth introducing "area unless area=no is present" in addition > to these. Particularly because whether area or way is the default would > depend on what is assumed to be more likely in reality. And people might > easily have different assumptions here, making that kind of default > non-obvious. I'm always standing in the contributor point of view. It is not the wiki (or better said "our recommendations") to follow the osm2pqsql style file but the opposite. I was asking myself why I accept so easily a 2nd tag for the highway closed loop and not for the railway platform. And this is because my assumption is coming form my own experience like all other mappers. Adding a 2nd tag is acceptable if we all meet at least some substantial examples IRL. Adding a 2nd tag just to fix a theoritical issue is much less acceptable, especially when the main reaction is to say that mapnik/osm2pgsql will fail because the assumption is done on a key, not a key/value pair. Here we speak about a non-obvious assumption for the 0.0000000000001% cases ... Pieren _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
