You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We currently have a number of catch-all renderings in the style were we depict features with a certain key independent of the value. That in particular
building=*
shop=*
office=*
for building and office we do this for the value yes like for any other value while for shop we explicitly exclude shop=yes. In all three cases the yes is broadly accepted as valid tagging if a more specific classification is not available to the mapper.
IMO we should:
treat shop=yes and office=yes equally in that regard.
probably show both in a way that explicitly communicates incomplete mapping - to clearly communicate that while this is a valid value with a well defined and consistently used meaning it is not just another type of shop/office but indicates something semantically different - like highway=road for roads.
For building=yes i would not suggest a special treatment because it is so widely used without being broadly considered to be lacking more specific information.
182k shop=yes and 80k office=yes. In both cases about 70% have names.
Possible suggestions for rendering that would hint to both map user and mappers that data is incomplete:
Use a lighter shade of shop / office colour for dot and any name. Using a lightened colour rather than reduced opacity might cause less semantic confusion with private access e.g. on parking.
A common grey colour (as in highway=road) for "incomplete objects". This has been suggested, but probably too jarring.
We currently have a number of catch-all renderings in the style were we depict features with a certain key independent of the value. That in particular
building=*
shop=*
office=*
for
building
andoffice
we do this for the valueyes
like for any other value while forshop
we explicitly excludeshop=yes
. In all three cases theyes
is broadly accepted as valid tagging if a more specific classification is not available to the mapper.IMO we should:
shop=yes
andoffice=yes
equally in that regard.highway=road
for roads.For
building=yes
i would not suggest a special treatment because it is so widely used without being broadly considered to be lacking more specific information.See also #4723.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: