On Wednesday 05 February 2020, Jeroen Hoek wrote: > > the semantic ambiguity of the > 350k cases where barrier tags are > > currently used as a secondary tag on landuse/leisure/etc. polygons > > to incidate the polygon is enclosed by a linear barrier. > > The PR specifically removes the filled rendering from `barrier=hedge` > mapped with `area=yes` from 36665 hedges.
No, it does not, the PR removes the fill rendering of all *polygons* tagged barrier=hedge. This includes closed ways with barrier=hedge and area=yes, closed ways with barrier=hedge and a different tag implying a polygon and also multipolygons. I explained the way the renderer interprets the data in the PR discussion. Understanding this and understanding the current meaning of the area=yes tag is *essential* for understanding the reasoning behind this change. What you essentially want is for barrier=hedge on polygons to have a different meaning depending on the presence of area=yes. Given the very specific and highly significant technical meaning of area=* overloading it with additional more specialized meanings w.r.t. specific tags seems a very bad idea to me. > A hedge is not the same as bushes or trees. I never claimed it to be. What i did say is that what is mapped with barrier=hedge on polygons with a different meaning than 'this polygon is enclosed by a hedge' is elsewhere predominantly mapped with natural=scrub/wood or landuse=forest. I demonstrated this with links to various places. Introducing a secondary tag to natural=scrub/wood and landuse=forest (like barrier=yes) indicating that it is impassible without difficulty would be a good idea and i would support rendering such in OSM-Carto as a variation of the rendering we currently have for those if it is being used consistently by mappers. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging