On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 01:24, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: My thinking is that both 'disused=yes' and 'disused:*=* tag the same > condition. As such they should be treated equally by renders. >
And my thinking is that there is a difference between a disused building (it's still a building) and a disused place of worship (it's no longer a place of worship). It is misleading to render a disused building as though the building did not exist. It is misleading to render a disused place of worship as though it is still a place of worship. Disused physical objects merit different treatment from disused functions. > The only reason why there is a preference for 'disused=yes' is that the > present 'standard' render is ignoring it. > Yep. Freely admitted. > If you want physical objects with tagging for disused, abandoned, etc > rendered on the 'standard' map then put a pull request in. > I suggested that as an alternative the last time this was discussed. I'm happy to use disused=yes as things stand at present and I'd be happy to use the disused prefix if it no longer prevented the rendering of physical objects. Either way is fine by me. However, it seems that two people from the carto crowd think disused=yes is the way to go. Maybe there are others in the carto crowd who think it better to have the disused prefix behave differently for physical objects. That's one of the reasons I'd like some sort of assurance that minds have been made up. > Stop tagging for the render. > I'm not lying for the renderer. I'm using one established way of tagging something in preference to a different, established way of tagging that thing. So are others. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
