[Tagging] Tagging FOR the renderer

[Frederik Ramm]

André,

   you're obviously bearing some grudge against "whoever makes decisions
in OSM" because your suggestions have been ignored. That's fine, you can
do that, but please don't run around and claim that just because you are
unhappy with things,

> Consequently, the consensus was "we prefer tagging for the renderer".

This is silly and you know it; no such consensus exists for any
definition of the word consensus.

> An alternative is for example using something like a rendered
> "landuse=tourism" for features more specifically defined 

...

> I called that "generic rendering" and even that was refused (the
> examples above are generalized existing tags).

I don't recall at the moment but probably you made a suggestion that
went "hey let's change everything to my cool new idea" and people went
"nah" and now you're miffed. In fact such "generic rendering" as you
call it does already exist in many places in OSM, here's a three-level
example of a lake:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/264574966

Of course using such tagging for everything would greatly increase the
amount of redundant data in the database; the information that a
turlough is a kind of lake, and a lake is a water feature, would be
replicated thousands of times across our database (along with the
theoretical liberty to tag a few turlough that are swamps instead if
someone so desired). This is one of the main counter arguments to this
style of tagging; it makes retrieving and processing information easier
because more information is intrinsic to the database, but at the same
time increases the data volume.

> So, the general consensus answer is clearly "please do tag for the
> renderer".

You argue like a child who has been denied candy and now runs around
telling everyone that obviously the "consensus" was that they should
starve.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"