> I still do not understand why area=yes is a bad tag... > you have problems to implement it in your workflow.
That is not correct. It is simple enough to check for the presence or abscenss of `area=yes` prior to rendering. See an attempt at https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/3834 (Though I now realize that this PR did not properly account for multipolygons relations). The problem with relying on `area=yes` for deciding how to render a feature like a hedge or wall is two-fold: 1) The tag `area=yes` is only supposed to mean "this closed way is an area, not a line", and is only used when this is not already obvious from other tags. It is not necessary to add `area=yes` when the closed way already has a tag which defines an area, such as `landuse=forest` or `natural=scrub` or `leisure=playground`: all of these keys are always areas when mapped as closed ways, so they do not require `area=yes`, whether or not `barrier=hedge` or `barrier=fence` is added. This also means that `area=yes` is never needed when the same object is turned into a multipolygon relation, so checking for `area=yes` alone is not sufficient A closed way with `hedge=barrier` + `natural=scrub` is an area, and the presence or abscense of `area=yes` should not be required. This makes this a poor tag to rely on for rendering decisions, at least for a style that influences how mappers use tags. 2) Many hedges which were mapped like areas are currently missing `area=yes` tags. In this comment (https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/3844#issuecomment-582692389) you can see that over 90% of the `barrier=hedge` closed ways in a Dutch province (random example) are missing `area=yes`, though they appear to be mapping the outline/area of the hedge. This means that a rendering solution that relies on `area=yes` would miss a large percentage of hedges mapped in this way. The situation is worse for barrier=wall. Most likely, many mappers do not see why they should need to add a tag like `area=yes` when they map a hedge as a closed way. A better solution is to use different tags for linear features and area features. This is the standard used in Openstreetmap for common linear features such as paths, roads, railways and waterways: the area and the line are different tags. (The rare exception to the rule that the same tag isn't used for lines and areas is for pedestrian plazas which are mapped with area=yes, but in this case the idea is that there is no linear feature: the area allows travel in "any" direction by pedestrians, so there is no "line" to map, just the area. Yet there often is confusion about how pedestrian highway areas should be mapped and how they differ from area:highway=, so this cannot be considered a good example to emulate in the future. ) _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
