On 6 May 2010 00:16, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > while I understand you and generally would agree this is not > OSM-reality. landuse-OSM is not landuse as you would guess by the > actual meaning. As long as surface or landcover are not rendered this > won't change, despite all "don't map for the renderers" appeals.
There is a trac ticket to get surface=grass to render, shouldn't we be encouraging the separation of landuse and landcover as generally a good idea? > this is in many case overengineered. I'm not against the use of > relations but for many landuses and buildings with only 2 nodes in > common a relation complicates the situation without any benefit. Even > the db gets more load when using the relation I suppose. For a normal > block in the city you would need 20-40 relations just because all > buildings are in touch. Depends on the buildings, there are many types of building that don't share walls... As for DB load, it just serves up information, it doesn't process the data when serving it, so I doubt it increases load on the DB server... _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
