Does anyone have a specific example of a place that should be tagged tourism=attraction but which cannot also be tagged with another feature? On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 9:55 PM Daniel Koć <daniel@koć.pl> wrote:
> W dniu 05.12.2018 o 11:40, Christoph Hormann pisze: > > It would certainly be good to stop rendering it to incentivize mappers > > to choose more meaningful tags instead but it also should be said that > > this is essentially a case of 'damage done' - the tag is already > > meaningless, stopping to render it would help better tagging in the > > future, it would not in any way add meaning to the tag as it is already > > used. > > > While I agree with your description of attraction tag, I am not sure if > this would help. If this is tagging for rendering, you can render more > features, so cheating would not be needed (and we do it at OSM Carto), > but stopping to render it might as well make people abuse other tags. > > People are not that simple, imposing something is not a sure way of > reaching some goal, it can easily backfire. > > > > We have however many other tags where OSM-Carto recently added or > > changed rendering in ways that provide mapping incentives agaist the > > established meaning of the tags. > > > I'm not sure what are you talking about (most probably I just don't > share your point of view), but I don't remember such cases. > > > -- > "Excuse me, I have some growing up to do" [P. Gabriel] > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
