Am 07.06.2013 15:49, schrieb Greg Troxel: > > Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> writes: > >> 2013/6/6 Toby Murray <toby.mur...@gmail.com> >> >>> We have gotten several notes reported from craigslist users saying "this >>> lake is missing from the map" but I think it turns out that craigslist is >>> not rendering landuse=reservoir so unless lakes have natural=water they >>> don't show up on the CL maps. Just another rendering oddity I guess. >> >> If you agree that landuse=reservoir doesn't necessarily need to be water on >> the whole area, then it seems logical to require a water-tag on the actual >> water covered area to render "blue". As long as the main style puts so much >> emphasis on landuse people will continue to map areas mainly with landuse >> and use very less frequent the physical tags which are not rendered. > > This essentially was the point I was trying to make: when humans see > landuse=reservoir, they think it means different things > > 1) parcel containing protection zone and water, arguably to be shaded > some light green natural/protected. should have water=reservoir on > the actual water, to be blue > > 2) what is water=reservoir in 1, and thus should be blue > > That's why I suggested landuse=reservoir_protection instead, but that > should include the water so it's not right etiher. > > I'm fine with landuse=reservoir, but then as always it needs to be clear > and renderers need to catch up.
But how to we proceed ? If we agree that landuse=reservoir should be used for the whole area. Do we need a temporary tag or adding water=reservoir to all of them? Only simple case are where a water=reservoir is already tagged (either on the same object or within one. Cheers fly _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging