At 2010-03-11 16:45, James Ewen wrote: >On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Alan Mintz ><[email protected]> wrote: > > > How about a standard headstone shape (semi-circle on top of a rectangle, > > e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Betjeman_memorial.JPG)? This seems > > pan-cultural. > >But what happens when people who don't use headstones complain? The >local graveyards around here do not allow standing memorials anymore, >you're only allowed to have a flat plaque, which makes it easier to >mow the grass...
I don't understand what their complaint would be. It's simply supposed to be an understandable symbol. I believe that most people, most places, would understand what it is supposed to mean. It's not supposed to be a picture of exactly what one finds on a specific grave. >The Osmarender engine uses the generic headstone shape, but it is >almost impossible to determine what the icon is supposed to represent. That complaint I understand. Maybe it needs to be redrawn. >No matter what we end up doing, someone will find a reason to object. >It's a never ending battle to try and make something that is >everything to everyone. That's not a good reason to do nothing, which is what usually ends up happening. So many of these conversations deteriorate into nit-picking or go flying off into discussions of particle physics - it's incredibly frustrating and ultimately bad for everyone, since there is never an easy, concrete answer for anything. Newbies that just want to map their town end up going elsewhere. -- Alan Mintz <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ newbies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/newbies
