On Oct 17, 2017 4:53 AM, "Christoph Hormann" <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tuesday 17 October 2017, Kevin Kenny wrote: > It's impossible to base a rendering decision on something that isn't > represented by any tag. That is not true, you can produce a lot of information through analysis of the data and by connecting it to data outside of OSM (which is usually outside of OSM because it is outside the scope of OSM). All good points. I'm afraid I get a bit prickly because I have several times been told that entering field-observable attributes of actual geographic features is 'tagging for the renderer' - I think simply because whoever was spouting off was not interested in those features. In any case, when I said 'something', I meant 'some thing' - an actual observable object. I concede that 'relative road importance' strains that definition. But I fail to see where any conceivable renderer would be able to get the information if we don't tag it. 'Relative importance' is not needed for symbology - that's determined by physical attributes (carriageways, lanes, shoulder width). It is, however, what would guide a rendering decision about the appropriate zoom level at which to display a way. Some ways that are pretty awful, physically, nevertheless should be shown on relatively small scale maps because they're the only road connections among significant communities. For what it's worth, except for 'motorway' and the problematic 'trunk', the Wiki definitions all are based on relative importance, not physical attributes. Arguably they're wrong, but a lot of data have been entered following them. (And a lot of bad data have been imported from TIGER or foisted upon us by NE2. Don't get me started.)
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
