<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2014-08-26 13:38, Christian Quest
wrote :<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAAXY6DOUKu6=t2aG01GkfmmnG3jwnhwM=JTarhrmHy84Y0UVtw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">André I think you missed a major thing about
cartography (and topography).
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As OSM contributors, we're not cartographers but
topographers... we record topographic data.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Then cartographers use that data, make choices to have some
objets of THEIR choice visible on the map THEY are making with
the data we collected.<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Christian, I think that you missed an important sentence of mine:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAAXY6DOUKu6=t2aG01GkfmmnG3jwnhwM=JTarhrmHy84Y0UVtw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">On the other hand, to address another
critique, RENDER can indicate that it means that the feature
is considered important either only for the standard map or
for some other categories of maps.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
When the mappers are doing the "tagging for the renderer" that I'm
trying to fight, they have a cartography point of view that their
features do not show and that's almost exclusively on the standard
map. Hence, RENDER would be a request to show on the standard map
(it would in fact be almost impossible to cope with all the sorts of
maps).<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAAXY6DOUKu6=t2aG01GkfmmnG3jwnhwM=JTarhrmHy84Y0UVtw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">These choices are made with
contraints: scale (no bus_stop at zoom 6), map use (trucks
don't care about bicycle parkings).</blockquote>
</div>
<div>These choices are not done at the data level, but at the
stylesheet level.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If you're not happy of the cartographer's choices... become
a cartographer yourself !</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
OSM gives you that freedom as anybody can use the same data,
and the same tool to do the map matching our choices by
designing their own stylesheet.</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cartographer">https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cartographer</a><br>
</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/topographer">https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/topographer</a></div>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">I'm on both sides... topographer as OSM
contributor, and cartographer make maps with OSM data.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">As a cartographer, I will not use such
a tag which does not give me control anymore on what appears
or not on the map I'm making.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
And it's normal because you do not draw the standard map.<br>
And note that RENDER is not coercive, not against any renderer's
decision to to to not map.<br>
But please notice that it's much easier to ignore rendering requests
made with a RENDER tag than those disguised with a "tagging for the
renderer" that I am trying to fight.<br>
All the replies in this thread showed absolutely no desire to join
the fight and make suggestions, just to disparage the idea.<br>
<br>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>André.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>