2014-09-16 15:32 GMT+02:00 Dave F. <[email protected]>: > I find it surprising something as arbitrary as size is used as the > defining factor. Comparing actual tags would surely make more sense. >
well, size surely has some correlation with importance. For practical reasons it is generally working quite well to have first render the bigger stuff and then render the smaller stuff on top, because it leads typically to less covering. In this particular case more detailed mapping of the tree areas could solve it, e.g. split the wood object at the cutting roads and waterways, but admittedly in this case by looking at the bing aerial imagery it seems indeed to be a continuity of trees on both sides of these. cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
