Steve Bennett wrote: > IMVHO, that approach is harmful in general (have you *seen* how many > different tags are out there?), and ironic in this instance. Yes, & unless I'm missing something your proposal just adds the long list. > > >If it's use *now *is a park, tag it as a park. > >When & if (and that's a *big *if when talking about civil engineering > projects) it changes use re-tag it then & not before. > > Did everyone misunderstand my example this way? The thing is a > reserve, not a park. It has grass, but no amenities. It only exists to > protect the land for future development. People tag them as parks > because that's the closest tag...but it's not ideal. My "tagging for > the future" remark had nothing to do with future development, only > future support of a "reserve" tag.
Very unclear in your OP. Anyway... Tag for how you see it is now. If it's not a park, change it! If it doesn't render, put a request in. Your claimed solution: landuse=reserve fallback:leisure=park still won't render & still needs to be requested & it adds an extra tag. Like I said, I think you're chasing your tail. > >Also, I think this should be on the Tagging forum. > > Yeah, maybe. I thought it was slightly out of scope for that. > > >In the end, OSM is a database, and how you are rendering a map is > something accessory, as "everyone" can set up the rendering the way > they want. It is the greatest strength of OSM that you can choose what > kind of rendering you can do. I think the map should deemphasized at > some point from the main site as more and more people want custom > rendering. > > I guess I will have to investigate this further, but that's really not > at all how I see OSM, and not how I think the public perceives it. The > diehards on this list may all have their own renderers set up at home, > but that's rare. For most people, the mapnik view *is* OSM, and > switching it off would be dumping OSM's biggest selling point. The > world has very much moved to a cloud model, whereas what you're > proposing (download the data, render it using an offline client) is > exactly the opposite of that. I just don't see that approach gaining > traction any more. If anything, I would have thought you'd put more > effort into custom rendering on the server, like cloudmade does. > > Of course, I could be completely wrong. That would at least explain > why I find the response of "make your own stylesheet" so jarring to my > original problem statement. > > >Yes, they are. If the render of your choice doesn't render a > key/tag,fix it yourself so that it does. > > Hmm, and I put so much effort into explaining the difference between a > one-off solution and a scalable solution. I thought I'd get more than > "yes it is". You suggestion is as much a "one-off" solution. It's not a one fix, fixes all, because you'll have another tag in a different situation & it won't render either, so you'll have to put in a request for it. And so on & so forth... What is your understanding of a 'scalable' solution? > >*You *asked for opinions!?! - "What do people think?" > >Replies are in the negative because they think your idea is poor for the > >reasons stated. It's as simple as that. > > Constructive critism is great, and there were some good points raised. > But by and large the response was not constructive. But only from your point of view. > > Steve > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
