[Tagging] Hiking route abandoned
colin.smale at xs4all.nl
Wed Oct 2 16:42:02 UTC 2013
Of course we tag for the renderer (a.k.a. data consumer), that's the
only reason OSM exists. What we DON'T do, is deliberately tag
*incorrectly* to persuade the renderer to produce a desired result.
Renderers need to be able to make certain distinctions - if not based on
an explicit tag, then by derivation based on other tags.
On 2013-10-02 18:20, Fernando Trebien wrote:
> I'm sorry but maybe some misspellings changed the message. So let me clarify.
> Renderers often don't support life cycle tags, but that doesn't matter because we don't tag for the renderer/applications, right? If you just add a disused tag, the route likely will still be rendered in current map styles made for hikers. That may or may not be a good thing. I think it's good if the route is still open to the public, otherwise no.
> Didn't mean to say hiking routes should not be rendered, sorry for the confusion. I think they should.
> On Oct 2, 2013 7:36 AM, "SomeoneElse" <lists at mail.atownsend.org.uk> wrote:
> Fernando Trebien wrote:
> Wouldn't the more generic disused=yes apply to this case? Rendering apps should support lifecycle tags and render them accordingly (though often then don't ...
> I think that you've answered your own question already :)
> ... and none would support this anyway).
> If you mean "don't render hiking routes" than that's obviously wrong; if you mean "don't render _disused_ hiking routes then that's probably a feature, but any that do render hiking routes that don't also look for disused=yes (or whatever) will miss it.
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging 
Tagging mailing list
Tagging at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging