On Fri, 7 Feb 2020 at 10:26, Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote:
> > I currently tend towards a broader solution of dropping rendering of all > barrier tags on polygons. Aaaaaaaarrrrrghhhhhh! No. Nononononono. "Oh dear, I've just made a change that upsets a lot of mappers. I'll deal with the problem by making an additional change that upsets even more mappers." You may not think of it that way, but that's how many mappers will see your proposal. Possibly a good solution if it affects only a few dozen objects, not a good solution given how many objects would need to be retagged. I originally was under the impression that > use of barrier tags as a secondary tag for landuse polygons etc. was > consensus among mappers based on the fairly large use numbers for that > (>350k) but it quite clearly isn't. Yes. A lot of mappers do that. Purists insist they should use "one way, one object" and map a park with a hedge around it as two coincident closed ways but at least one editor makes this very difficult to maintain. So people take the easy way out and a LOT of objects have been tagged that way. > So it would make a lot of sense > for OSM-Carto to stop indicating this is valid tagging. And require a LOT of edits to fix things. Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo! This is not the sort of change that should be made given how common it is. appers, in the long term be possible to interpret barrier tags on > polygons as 2d barriers again but it might be a better idea - as Joseph > indicated - to use a different tag than for linear barriers to avoid > confusion. Using the same tag for 1d and 2d representations always > bears the potential for problems (like leisure=track for example). > The thing is, if I read Andy Townsend's comments correctly, you've made this change because a relatively small number of situations give rise to silly rendering. Situations that most people here regard as bad tagging in the first place. Most people here think it would have been better to not have made the change and tell anyone who got unexpected results to fix their broken tagging. Instead you seem to have fixed things for the few at the expense of the many and, now the many are complaining you propose to break lots of other things too. This seems sub-optimal. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
