<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 3:15 PM, Andy Townsend <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ajt1047@gmail.com" target="_blank">ajt1047@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><span class="">
<div class="m_4203983801242512082moz-cite-prefix">On 26/04/2018 14:52, Paul Allen wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font size="2">Although other updates I made at the same
time were rendered, the pumping<br>
station wasn't. <br>
</font></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
... on some maps. It'll appear on others, such as:<br>
<br>
<a class="m_4203983801242512082moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=20&lat=52.0821841&lon=-4.657313" target="_blank">https://map.atownsend.org.uk/<wbr>maps/map/map.html#zoom=20&lat=<wbr>52.0821841&lon=-4.657313</a>
*<br>
<br>
I wouldn't let the fact that one map style has problems with certain
kinds of infrastructure influence tagging.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yeah, but I think it sub-optimal to have to point people at a particular renderer to see something. I'm a<br></div><div>"Best viewed on any renderer" kind of guy. :) Even though I think that your rendering is, overall, better<br></div><div>than the standard one, I doubt you'd want the extra traffic if everyone used it.<br></div><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Generally speaking
mappers are pretty good at figuring out when a building or a landuse
tag is needed in addition to an existing feature tag.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>As I did. By finding a few examples with overpass-turbo after finding that the wiki didn't cut it, nor did iD's presets.<br></div><div>In general, the easier it is to find the right way to do it, the more likely it is to be done right.<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Outright "
falsehoods to fool the renderer" are actually pretty rare.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I wanted to make it clear I didn't consider either of those approaches to commit the sin of tagging for the renderer<br>(even if that's the real reason why they were used).<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Of
course by all means try and improve the wiki page for a particular
feature explaining how people map things (buildings vs
non-buildings). This probably means I'm agreeing with "4" of your
list of 7,</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Number 4 was my second choice.<br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"> but TBH anything that improves the wik iand reflects
current tagging would be good.<br></blockquote>
<br>
I'll wait to see a few more comments before I conclude that it is considered by most to<br>be an improvement.<br><br>
* the fact that it currently appears on that map in English rather
than Welsh is actually a bug, but that's a different issue...<br>
</div><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">Since I don't speak a word of Welsh, I consider that a feature rather than a bug. :)<br><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">-- <br></div><div class="gmail_quote">Paul<br><br></div></div></div>