> On 9. Feb 2019, at 22:46, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 9. Feb 2019, at 15:23, Tom Pfeifer <t.pfei...@computer.org> wrote: > > > > IMHO this violates the one object - one OSM element principle. > > > IMHO it doesn’t. One tag describes a tree row, the other individual trees. It > doesn’t matter that it is the same trees. > Mapping a residential area doesn’t prevent you from mapping single houses. > > You could also map individual trees in a forest and have natural=tree inside > a landuse=forest, although this is not usually done in OSM.
I'd support dropping tree_row as a way, if the individual trees are mapped. In the latter case, tree_row is a relation of the individual items. A renderer could then decide by styling theme, if it computes a line between the extremal points of that relation _or_ the individually mapped trees. The problem with the combined approach now is that mappers are not disciplined enough to include each tree node in tree_row's way. Which means a simple filter if (tree_row) then ignore_render(child(tree_row)) end will mostly not work, and doing nearby calculation for this will be very costly, as there are still a lot of trees around (knock on wood). Greetings _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
