On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Emilie Laffray <[email protected]>wrote:
> That would mean that Mapnik needs to be checking a secondary field to > determine what to display. If the renderer doesn't do that, you will end up > with a map that is poorer in the end. In your case, that would mean > increasing the size of the table produced by osm2pgsql by one extra column. > Overall, you are increasing complexity with little or no benefits. > I am not sure it makes sense in the end since were are getting exactly the > same of information if you are using the tag directly in landuse. > If using farm as a base tag (or forest), you will make sure that thos not interested in the details, still can use the data. To me that is a very clear advantage. You have two choices: Let those interested in detail check for details (two tags) or require everyone to check for the details. I fail to see any disadvantages of using landuse=farm + farm=orchard (or something similar). Waisting a few bits in a database is simply not a problem. - Gustav
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
