On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 at 15:07, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 14. Aug 2020, at 14:45, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < > tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > > > Maybe outright recommending removal after trees are mapped would be even > better? > > vandalism. It’s like suggesting removing the lit tag after street lamps > have been added. Or some landuse after buildings have been mapped. Or > removing the bridge attribute on roads after the bridge object has been > mapped as man_made=bridge. > You seem to be making a number of assumptions. 1) That "tree-lined" is a useful independent property of objects in the same way that "lit" is. I disagree. It is, at best, a trivial property. 2) That "tree-lined" (which requires a query tool to find) is more useful than a tree row for end users. I disagree. 3) That, one day, routers might preferentially route along tree-lined roads rather than non-tree-lined roads, in the same way they preferentially route along lit roads. Do any route along lit roads? I can see that a router which offers walking routes might eventually prefer lit routes. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
