I'll agree with Andy. Don't drop map features for aesthetic reasons. Maybe we need two styles on the osm.orgm style, a "nice" one for map users and and "ugly", but loaded with features mappers-map.
regards m On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 1:56 AM, SomeoneElse <li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk> wrote: > On 30/06/2014 22:23, Matthijs Melissen wrote: > > We are currently considering dropping the rendering of access=permissive > (currently rendered as green dashes) from openstreetmap-carto, the main map > on opensteetmap.org. > > > What would be useful would be some comments from the authors of these > changes about what they think the "standard map" is actually _for_. > Previously the story was that it was "for mappers", but that seems to be no > longer the case. > > I've seen very little written justification for this series of changes. > The nearest on the previous change ( > https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/542) was "but > I've seen a few "abandoned" railway lines being rendered diagonally across > well mapped housing estates, and it looks terrible." - which is no > justification at all; you could use a similar argument in favour of not > rendering natural=beach because people use it on golf courses. > > That's not to say that you _couldn't_ make an argument in favour of the > "standard" style becoming an "Open Mapquest Lite" - for map consumers > rather than for map makers - but something needs to replace it, so that new > mappers can see the results of their efforts. Or maybe mappers are no > longer such a rare resource that we don't need to encourage them any more? > > Cheers, > > Andy > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
