11 Sep 2019, 01:54 by pla16...@gmail.com:
> On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 at 23:41, Graeme Fitzpatrick <> graemefi...@gmail.com
> <mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> > wrote:
>
>>
>> Would it need a multipolygon? My impression of the ODA is an open patch of
>> ground in / beside a residential area. If that is the case, wouldn't it be
>> much simpler to just mark a new area in as landuse=o_d_a? (accept it
>> wouldn't be abbreviated)
>>
>
> Overlapping landuse often works, but only because the carto people juggle
> z-indexes
> to make it work. They're not overly happy doing that, I believe.
>
well, reality is that sometimes area
is actually both tree-covered area and
for example university or residential area.
> It also doesn't always
> work well: if ever you've put a pond in a wood without a multipolygon you get
> waterlogged trees.
>
this is intentional to encourage correct
mapping of tree-covered areas.
> It also makes database queries somewhat more simpler if you're
> asking what is at point A and you get one answer rather than two answers, or
> one of
> two answers chosen at random.
>
note that in many cases getting two
answers correctly represents reality
>
> A multipolygon is a little more work for the mapper,
> but not much more.
>
> Now I expect both the carto and db people to tell me I'm wrong about that.
> If they do,
> I'll just point out that it's not wrong to use a multipolygon for this
>
and in even more cases multipolygon
should be used
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
