On Wednesday 05 February 2020, Jeroen Hoek wrote: > > But that is not in any way sustainable and it would be highly > > confusing for mappers because the conditions resulting in this > > rendering would be unique and could not be derived from any general > > principles. > > I understand the reasoning, but what mappers see now is: > > You thought you could map hedges as areas using `area=yes`, the > > wiki told you that, and you've seen it done like that everywhere, > > but it was wrong, there is no way to map hedges as areas, and all > > those hedges you and your fellow mapper mapped are now tens of > > thousands of errors on the map. > > That is, to put it mildly, quite confusing, not to mention > disheartening.
I understand and agree (not on there being no way to map hedges with polygons though - i have commented on that already) and although as you mentioned this is not fully the fault of osm-carto (you mentioned the wiki, editors are another culprit) osm-carto previously communicating to mappers this to be correct tagging has a huge part in creating this confusion. But having made an error in the past does not mean we need to carry it indefinitely into the future. I am generally inclined to follow the principle in case there is disagreement about the meaning of certain tagging to in case of doubt opt for not rendering something compared to rendering something in a potentially misleading way. That would mean following Paul's suggestion here and dropping rendering of barrier=* on polygons all together. Do you think this would be an improvement compared to the current rendering? -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
