Jan 23, 2019, 1:00 AM by pelder...@gmail.com: > > Vr gr Peter Elderson > > Landcover tag now approaches 100 000 occurrences. Still growing despite not > being rendered. I would think rendering the top three landcover values is > not out of place. The github issues are still there. Initially: > And please use that GitHub issues for discussing this. Github issues of (even important) projects are not acceptable place to discuss tagging, discussing how specific projects should render things is utterly offtopic here. And I admit that continued "landcover must be rendered in this one specific project that I will not mention by name making my complaint not only offtopic but also utterly useless" mails on TAGGING mailing list make me think badly about this tagging concept. Hopefully we have not reached stage that I am falling for false flag. > After that, further steps could be discussed. Until this is done, in my > opinion every discussion about the usage of landuse tags is doomed to fail. > There simply is no way forward if there is no rendering alternative. > Anyone may make their own rendering. And if you are stuck then you can reach out to people who may help. > If landcover=grass is rendered, a clearing in a landuse=forest could simply > be tagged as a polygon with landuse=grass, without cutting up the forest. > > The main objection would be: existing base. But the landcover rendering does > not harm the existing base; it's fully backwards compatible. > This two paragraphs contradict each other.
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
