I don't see any thing against using level=* to solve some rendering issues.
Feature-independance is maybe the key for more simplicity and versatility. As location=underground is one other example. power=cable isn't feature independent at all, are we? 2013/1/16 A.Pirard.Papou <a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com> > I'm somewhat of a tourist in this thread (if you didn't notice) but I > can't help wondering why these lines aka cables are not tagged with at > least layer=±3 (1). > Now, if we do not want the non-specialized renderer to be updated with > each new feature, the best is a tag telling whether a underground hidden > object has to be rendered with a dotted line. This is not tagging for the > renderer (2), it is making an OSMap. > > This is the same feature-independence reasoning as saying that bridges are > black objects a little wider than the road, just that, and tagged at level > road-1, thus supporting the road without interrupting nor hiding it (as > done at legacy level +1) and extending two black stripes to each side. > While bridge=yes was OK, I have had rendering problems with bridge=culvert > and I'm wondering why the renderer is messing in the hidden underskirt of a > bridge :-) > > Cheers, > > André. > (1) which should have been called level in my mind. > BTW, wiki/Layer had better say that the ground at Earth surface is layer 0. > (2) which is working around its mistakes > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > -- *François Lacombe* francois dot lacombe At telecom-bretagne dot eu http://www.infos-reseaux.com
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
