2010/5/14 John Smith <deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com>: > On 15 May 2010 05:27, Jonas Minnberg <sas...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Oh and I forgot: >> * landuse=grass overlapping landuse=wood, grass set as layer=-1 > > Are you mixing up landuse and land cover by any chance?
you're insisting on this one? Yes, you are right: in traditional geoscience landuse is a precise term, it describes the usage of a given area in a generalized way. Unfortunately this is not true when it come to OSM: just open your eyes. Have you ever downloaded a piece of Berlin? You would be astonished ;-). Our landuse is often fragmented (IMHO not bad, because if there is different stuff, how else should you point that out? It is easier to summarize different landuses to one according to type and size than it is to divide 1 big generalized landuse automatically into all of it's subparts). How many landcover-tags are there in OSM? Is grass, garages or landfill a landuse? Another example: cut off (burned down) forest: this would probably still be called landuse=forest in an official map, but in OSM if there are no trees it will not be a forest. On the other hand: I would like to see this mess tidyed up. In this case I suggest to first change (extend) render rules and then encourage people to change tagging. This is all because of tagging for the renderers: because it is sad to tag "correct" and you don't see anything on the map ;-). I don't promote a cluttered or coloured map: I do promote rendering of lots of tags, but they don't have to get all different colours. Also few colours (i.e. many features/tags with the same colour) can be a way to do it. cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
