> 14 dec. 2020 kl. 19:06 skrev Ture Pålsson <t...@turepalsson.se>: > > I have implemented the merge-adjacent-areas scheme in my renderer. I’ll try > to get a demo up… :-) > > Having said that, as a renderer implementer, I have a slight preference for > the relation method. It is s implyeasier to join things on numeric id than to > join them by adjacency.
I don’t remember whether this has already been mentioned, but it just occurred to me: One problem with merging adjacent areas for labelling purposes, is when the areas share no tags, except the name. For example, it is not unusual to have a natural=wetland sharing some boundary with a natural=water, where the name applies to the entire wet area. So you can’t just merge adjacent natuarl=wetland, you also have to remember to merge natural=water with adjacent natural=wetland, if their names match. And natural=riverbank. And landuse=reservoir ( :-) ). And the gods of cartography knows what else. I am now leaning a bit heavier towards the ”relation” alternative…
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
