[Tagging] building=disused

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Fri Jan 17 08:00:00 UTC 2020




16 Jan 2020, 23:36 by 61sundowner at gmail.com:

> On 17/1/20 2:48 am, Paul Allen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 14:55, Mateusz Konieczny          <>> matkoniecz at tutanota.com>> >          wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> 16 Jan 2020, 02:22 by >>> 61sundowner at gmail.com>>> :
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If the 'standard map' starts rendering 'disused=yes'                  the same way as 'disused:*=*' (presently not rendered)                  then what? 
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Then standard map style will be fixed to
>>> remove this bug.
>>>
>>
>> I took Warin's question to mean what would happen if            standard carto
>> deliberately chose to handle disused=yes the same way as
>> disused:*=*.  Therefore not a bug to be fixed, but an            intentional
>> permanent change to behaviour.
>>
>> If that happened, I would stop marking physical objects            as disused. 
>>
>
>
>
>
> And that is a problem. A reduction in information caused by a      render failing to render information. 
>
>
Note that problem is 100% theorethical and it is not happening.

And as far as I can influence it - that will not happen.

>
> If the render were to render disused:* then I think all would be      happy?
>
>
No.

For disused:building=*
(1) it duplicates (attempts to replace) an existing tagging scheme
(2) for building tagging it is not an improvement in any way
(3) using it breaks basically all data consumers
(4) AFAIK there is no clear agreement that it is a good idea
For disused:* it is frankly horrible idea.

Rendering disused shops, churches and other disused:amenity, disused:leisure
like actually active ones sounds like a terrible mistake.

And anyway rendering discussions are offtopic here (I will try to stop myself from further
comments specifically about rendering).


>
> PS the reason I prefer disused:* is that the scheme is well      documented, logical extensions and appeals to me. 
>
>
I dislike disused:building because it is not logical, not backward compatible, 
using it breaks all current actually used data consumers, adds no useful info,
attempted to replace existing tagging by wikifiddling without proposal,
used less often than the standard solution.

And is not appealing to me because I am an obnoxious conservative anarchist
who dislikes changing things without a good reason.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200117/51ed076b/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list