[Tagging] barrier=hedge

Peter Elderson pelderson at gmail.com
Thu Feb 13 14:18:37 UTC 2020


Both options do not support established and documented tagging. The way to
manage this kind of change is to discuss a road to better tagging
while keeping rendering of the established tagging until this has been
accomplished. If retagging is a part of improvement, time should be allowed
to get this done. I would gladly participate in developing better tagging
if needed, and in doing the work according to a broadly adopted and
documented improved tagging scheme.

The current approach is quite different, non-cooperative and
counterproductive.

Best.Peter Elderson


Op do 13 feb. 2020 om 07:36 schreef Joseph Eisenberg <
joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com>:

> See a suggestion by Christoph at
>
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/3844#issuecomment-583848782
> :
>
> "If anyone wants to develop a followup to this change - i prepared two
> branches that could be helpful:
>
> 1)
> https://github.com/imagico/osm-carto-alternative-colors/tree/no-barrier-polygons
>
> "This implements the complete removal of rendering barrier=* on
> polygons - as discussed this would remove support for an in general
> inherently ambiguous mapping practice - which is however unfortunately
> widely used. It would provide a clean slate in terms of barrier
> mapping (leaving only the undisputed and consistently used mapping on
> linear ways) and would allow mappers to decide on an approach without
> being influenced in a counterproductive direction by this style. It
> would however also mean removing the rendering of several hundred
> thousand features currently rendered.
>
> 2)
> https://github.com/imagico/osm-carto-alternative-colors/tree/hedge_polygons_as_landcover
>
> "This adds barrier=hedge to the landcover layer and does not render it
> with the other barrier tags as a secondary tag on polygons any more.
> Functionally this is somewhat similar to a revert of this change - but
> it would do so cleanly and consistently with the other tags in the
> landcover layer. Note this means among other things having features
> with barrier=hedge default to being polygons, that any other landcover
> tag has precedence over barrier=hedge and that they are rendered
> within the normal way_area based sorting of the landcover layer.
>
> "I will not submit a PR for either of these changes at this time but i
> don't want to choke a potential consensus in either direction. If
> anyone wants to prepare and argue for a change based on either of
> these approaches that would be welcome and i would be willing to
> listen to their arguments.
>
> "What i would as said strongly oppose however is any change that tries
> to interpret the area=yes tag in any way on the style level beyond the
> decision of linestring or polygon on the data import level."
>
> Also see
> https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/3611#issuecomment-585573596
> about that last question: should `barrier=hedge` closed ways be
> imported as polygons (necessary for rendering as areas) if they lack
> `area=yes`?
>
> - Joseph Eisenberg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200213/9f09ad36/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list