[Tagging] recommend tagging of volcanos as ways rather than nodes

Daniel Koć daniel at xn--ko-wla.pl
Tue Mar 31 00:42:25 UTC 2015


W dniu 31.03.2015 0:47, John Willis napisał(a):

> They worry so much about vandalism and "verifiability" - but landmark
> and "importance" level of local things can only be mapped and verified
> by local mappers - mappers are trusted to map so many things, this
> should be one of them.

I don't know this case, but I know case with adding more POI icons:

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1402#issuecomment-85010118

I guess it's Andy Allan himself which is the most conservative and - 
sadly - not too vocal about his choices. And he's rather not aware how 
powerful he is. Being the final authority on what gets (or does not get) 
into the default map rendering, he has kind of real "veto" for tagging 
schemes (like with partial public_transport=* implementation).

I also strongly disagree with such approach. Do we have examples of any 
substantial tagging misuse (other than tagging for rendering, which is 
also a consequence of too tight rules) or is it just overly cautious 
behavior, as I suspect?

> We should have at least more than 2 kinds of mountains based on
> relative size and importance, in some manner.

Once I wanted to have more types of peaks, based on the same principle:

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/peak

but users of this list were generally not sympathetic to this idea.

-- 
Piaseczno Miasto Wąskotorowe



More information about the Tagging mailing list