On Jan 13, 2008 4:07 PM, Alex L. Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Karl Newman wrote: > > On Jan 13, 2008 2:13 PM, Alex Mauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > Robin Paulson wrote: > > > the point i'm trying to get across, is that all water features, be > > > they linear (rivers, canals, stream) or areas (lakes, reservoirs) > or > > > whatever would benefit from being under _one_ top-level tag, for > > > consistency. > > > > Hmm, are you sure? Is it easy for a renderer to differentiate a > > linear > > feature from an area without a distinct tag? I don't think it > > could be. > > > > -Alex Mauer "hawke" > > > > > > Why not just add an area=yes tag? > Because in my experience, that always puts the name of the thing in the > middle of the area. E.g. a turning circle at the end of a dead-end > road, defined as an area, will put the name of the road in the middle of > it. > > -Alex Mauer "hawke" >
Let's not confuse rendering issues with data issues. The point was that the single high-level water tag could be used to designate water. Adding area=yes will indicate that it is an area (lake, etc.), not just a line. Karl
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
