Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
20 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Joseph Eisenberg
Question: Will mappers understand if adding or taking away "area=yes"
from a closed way changes the rendering?

Background: Right now the wiki pages for barrier=wall and
barrier=hedge allow these features to be mapped as an area, but the
closed way is supposed to have the tag "area=yes" added to make it
clear that this is an area, rather than a linear feature that happens
to be in a circle. This is also the case for a number of other
features that are usually mapped as lines but can also be mapped as
areas, eg piste:type=downhill, piste:type=nordic.

Currently the ID editor is supposed to always add the tag "area=yes"
to features that can be mapped as an area or a line when the user
selects the type area while mapping. (I'm not sure if JOSM is as
consistent about recommending this or checking during validation).

Example: I'm considering using the tag "area=yes" to check if a
barrier should be rendered as an area. Right now "barrier=hedge" is
rendered as an area in the Openstreetmap-carto if it is imported as a
polygon. This happens for all closed ways that are tagged "area=yes",
but it also happens if the closed way is tagged with both
"barrier=hedge" and "landuse" or "natural" or "amenity", because these
keys are normally imported as areas.

It's not ideal to map 2 different features using the same way, but it
happens commonly.

So we could fix some rendering mistakes by checking for the presence
of "area=yes", and only render the fill color for hedges if there is
an "area=yes" tag. This could also work for things like
"barrier=wall".

Do you think that mappers will be able to figure out the problem if
the rendering changes when adding or removing area=yes?

Will validators in JOSM and other editors be able to point out a
problem if a closed way is tagged with both "area=yes",
"barrier=hedge" and "landuse=meadow"?

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Phake Nick
>Example: I'm considering using the tag "area=yes" to check if a
>barrier should be rendered as an area. Right now "barrier=hedge" is
>rendered as an area in the Openstreetmap-carto if it is imported as a
>polygon. This happens for all closed ways that are tagged "area=yes",
>but it also happens if the closed way is tagged with both
"barrier=hedge" and "landuse" or "natural" or "amenity", because these
>keys are normally imported as areas

I don't think those tags like "landuse" should exist in the same OSM object as closed way barrier tag, because the area inside closed way is a different object from the barrier that make the closed way and thus per the one feature one object rule they should be drawn separately

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Tagging mailing list
In reply to this post by Joseph Eisenberg


On 13/04/2019 01:37, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

> Example: I'm considering using the tag "area=yes" to check if a
> barrier should be rendered as an area. Right now "barrier=hedge" is
> rendered as an area in the Openstreetmap-carto if it is imported as a
> polygon. This happens for all closed ways that are tagged "area=yes",
> but it also happens if the closed way is tagged with both
> "barrier=hedge" and "landuse" or "natural" or "amenity", because these
> keys are normally imported as areas.
>
> It's not ideal to map 2 different features using the same way, but it
> happens commonly.

Mapping two features with the same way seem highly efficient.
That OSM-Carto's software is unable to deal with it, is a long-standing
weakness & should be rewritten to solve it. However, regrettably those
involved in the project seem to like using the software's shortcomings
as an excuse not to sort out problems, so I don't see that happening any
time soon.

DaveF

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Philip Barnes
In reply to this post by Joseph Eisenberg
Hedges are normally linear feature and being a rambler in rural Shropshire I map a lot of them.

It is quite common to map a hedge as a closed way around a field with barrier nodes for gates and stiles. Without an area tag I would assume this norm, it is how very  many are mapped.

Sometimes a hedge can be thick, and have two stiles/gates at each side, with maybe a stream and a footbridge inside. I add area=yes to these.

The rendering as it stands works fine, changing this would break a lot of existing mapping. Please leave it alone.

Phil (trigpoint)
 

On Saturday, 13 April 2019, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

> Question: Will mappers understand if adding or taking away "area=yes"
> from a closed way changes the rendering?
>
> Background: Right now the wiki pages for barrier=wall and
> barrier=hedge allow these features to be mapped as an area, but the
> closed way is supposed to have the tag "area=yes" added to make it
> clear that this is an area, rather than a linear feature that happens
> to be in a circle. This is also the case for a number of other
> features that are usually mapped as lines but can also be mapped as
> areas, eg piste:type=downhill, piste:type=nordic.
>
> Currently the ID editor is supposed to always add the tag "area=yes"
> to features that can be mapped as an area or a line when the user
> selects the type area while mapping. (I'm not sure if JOSM is as
> consistent about recommending this or checking during validation).
>
> Example: I'm considering using the tag "area=yes" to check if a
> barrier should be rendered as an area. Right now "barrier=hedge" is
> rendered as an area in the Openstreetmap-carto if it is imported as a
> polygon. This happens for all closed ways that are tagged "area=yes",
> but it also happens if the closed way is tagged with both
> "barrier=hedge" and "landuse" or "natural" or "amenity", because these
> keys are normally imported as areas.
>
> It's not ideal to map 2 different features using the same way, but it
> happens commonly.
>
> So we could fix some rendering mistakes by checking for the presence
> of "area=yes", and only render the fill color for hedges if there is
> an "area=yes" tag. This could also work for things like
> "barrier=wall".
>
> Do you think that mappers will be able to figure out the problem if
> the rendering changes when adding or removing area=yes?
>
> Will validators in JOSM and other editors be able to point out a
> problem if a closed way is tagged with both "area=yes",
> "barrier=hedge" and "landuse=meadow"?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

--
Sent from my Sailfish device
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Mateusz Konieczny-3
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
Apr 13, 2019, 11:19 AM by [hidden email]:
regrettably those involved in the project seem to like using the software's shortcomings as an excuse not to sort out problems
Note sure what was the intention of this comment, but at least in my case it is

- discouraging from spending time on OSM Carto
- discouraging from spending time on tagging mailing list
- discouraging from solving this issue in way that you would like it to happen
(the last one is irrational and I am trying to fight against it)

For your information, this thread was started because there is currently
work happening to solve that issue.

See recent comments in
and
https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/971

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Shawn K. Quinn
In reply to this post by Tagging mailing list
On 4/13/19 04:19, Dave F via Tagging wrote:
> Mapping two features with the same way seem highly efficient.
> That OSM-Carto's software is unable to deal with it, is a long-standing
> weakness & should be rewritten to solve it. However, regrettably those
> involved in the project seem to like using the software's shortcomings
> as an excuse not to sort out problems, so I don't see that happening any
> time soon.

+1

It makes no sense to have to add separate ways for barrier=fence and
leisure=park when the fence surrounds the entire park. Also JOSM's
validator will complain about overlapping ways if you have two ways with
the same nodes.

--
Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]>
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

dieterdreist


sent from a phone

> On 13. Apr 2019, at 19:58, Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> It makes no sense to have to add separate ways for barrier=fence and
> leisure=park when the fence surrounds the entire park.


you could make the park a multipolygon.


Cheers, Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Warin
As a closed way would normally be taken as an area,but in the case of this barrier it is required not to be an area, why not use the tag area=no?

Tag the unusual rather than the normal?

Then, as Martin says, use the way of the barrier in a multipolygon relation for a park.



On 14/04/19 06:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 13. Apr 2019, at 19:58, Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> It makes no sense to have to add separate ways for barrier=fence and
>> leisure=park when the fence surrounds the entire park.
>
> you could make the park a multipolygon.
>
>
> Cheers, Martin



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Phake Nick
area=no would also applies to amenity=park or landcover=* if you are tagging them in the same object.

在 2019年4月14日週日 05:16,Warin <[hidden email]> 寫道:
As a closed way would normally be taken as an area,but in the case of this barrier it is required not to be an area, why not use the tag area=no?

Tag the unusual rather than the normal?

Then, as Martin says, use the way of the barrier in a multipolygon relation for a park.



On 14/04/19 06:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 13. Apr 2019, at 19:58, Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> It makes no sense to have to add separate ways for barrier=fence and
>> leisure=park when the fence surrounds the entire park.
>
> you could make the park a multipolygon.
>
>
> Cheers, Martin



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Warin
On 14/04/19 14:15, Phake Nick wrote:
area=no would also applies to amenity=park or landcover=* if you are tagging them in the same object.

If a were were

tagged barrier=*, area=no

A member of a relation as the outer way tagged amenity=park

Would not the way be both then recognised as

a) a barrier
b) a park - that does not inherit the tags on the way.

????

在 2019年4月14日週日 05:16,Warin <[hidden email]> 寫道:
As a closed way would normally be taken as an area,but in the case of this barrier it is required not to be an area, why not use the tag area=no?

Tag the unusual rather than the normal?

Then, as Martin says, use the way of the barrier in a multipolygon relation for a park.



On 14/04/19 06:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 13. Apr 2019, at 19:58, Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> It makes no sense to have to add separate ways for barrier=fence and
>> leisure=park when the fence surrounds the entire park.
>
> you could make the park a multipolygon.
>
>
> Cheers, Martin



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Shawn K. Quinn
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
On 4/13/19 15:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> On 13. Apr 2019, at 19:58, Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> It makes no sense to have to add separate ways for barrier=fence and
>> leisure=park when the fence surrounds the entire park.
>
> you could make the park a multipolygon.

This makes even less sense and is even clumsier, especially for those
using iD if memory serves correctly. Single-member multipolygons are
also a clear misuse of the multipolygon relation; the prefix "multi"
means more than one. If, for some reason, the fence or the park boundary
differ, I can see making one or both a multipolygon, but if they are the
same then they should be tagged on the same way (at least as I see it).

--
Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]>
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Phake Nick


sent from a phone

> On 14. Apr 2019, at 06:15, Phake Nick <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> area=no would also applies to amenity=park or landcover=* if you are tagging them in the same object.


you cannot map them on the same object. The name would also apply to the fence, the height would also apply to the park, etc.

Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Shawn K. Quinn


sent from a phone

> On 14. Apr 2019, at 08:37, Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> This makes even less sense and is even clumsier, especially for those
> using iD if memory serves correctly.


I did not experience problems with id in such cases, but I also would not let the mapping concepts be lead by a single editing software. Editors can always be updated if they cannot cope with certain concepts, while there is no easy fix for ambiguous map data.


> Single-member multipolygons are
> also a clear misuse of the multipolygon relation; the prefix "multi"
> means more than one.


it is not a misuse, the minimum requirements for multipolygon members is one outer way, at most it is an unfortunate name for the kind of relation.



> If, for some reason, the fence or the park boundary
> differ, I can see making one or both a multipolygon, but if they are the
> same then they should be tagged on the same way (at least as I see it).


If you tag them “on the same way” you state that they are the same thing and that all tags apply to it contemporaneously. I would say they could be mapped with the same way delimiting them (but as distinct objects). The fence is the boundary of the park, there is some connection between the two, but they are not the same thing.

Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

marc marc
In reply to this post by Joseph Eisenberg
Le 13.04.19 à 02:37, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit :
> Will validators in JOSM and other editors be able to point out a
> problem if a closed way is tagged with both "area=yes",
> "barrier=hedge" and "landuse=meadow"?

a area with a fence as an attribute of this area
is better described with fenced=yes
maybe we need a value for fenced in with a hedge
like fenced=hedge
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Warin
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
A barrier on a park will have some means of getting in!!!

So the barrier will not be continuous - having gate/s or gaps etc.

The park boundary would then consist of the way that is the fence/barrier and other ways (possibly a gate etc) and that then meets the definition for a multipolygon relation.



On 14/04/19 16:49, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

>
> sent from a phone
>
>> On 14. Apr 2019, at 08:37, Shawn K. Quinn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> This makes even less sense and is even clumsier, especially for those
>> using iD if memory serves correctly.
>
> I did not experience problems with id in such cases, but I also would not let the mapping concepts be lead by a single editing software. Editors can always be updated if they cannot cope with certain concepts, while there is no easy fix for ambiguous map data.
>
>
>> Single-member multipolygons are
>> also a clear misuse of the multipolygon relation; the prefix "multi"
>> means more than one.
>
> it is not a misuse, the minimum requirements for multipolygon members is one outer way, at most it is an unfortunate name for the kind of relation.
>
>
>
>> If, for some reason, the fence or the park boundary
>> differ, I can see making one or both a multipolygon, but if they are the
>> same then they should be tagged on the same way (at least as I see it).
>
> If you tag them “on the same way” you state that they are the same thing and that all tags apply to it contemporaneously. I would say they could be mapped with the same way delimiting them (but as distinct objects). The fence is the boundary of the park, there is some connection between the two, but they are not the same thing.
>
> Cheers, Martin
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Joseph Eisenberg
Gates can be mapped as nodes, so the fence or hedge or wall can be
mapped as a single way that goes around the field, and the gates or
stiles as nodes of that way.

I agree with everyone who says that it is best practice to map a
"barrier=hedge" as separate feature from a "landuse=meadow", but in
reality many mappers like to use the same way for both features.

Perhaps some of them think of it as a sub-tag like "fenced=yes" - it
isn't always clear if a tag is a separate feature or a characteristic
of another feature.

But at any rate, we would like to avoid confusing mappers with the
rendering result at Openstreetmap-Carto. These are the 2 options for
how to deal with closed ways that are tagged with another feature.

1) As now, keep rendering a closed way tagged as "barrier=hedge" and
"landuse=*" or "natural=*" as a hedge area, with dark green fill color
over the whole field. Sometimes this gives mappers a hint to change
the rendering, but this combination is still very common in the
database, and the rendering is clearly not what the mapper intended.

2) Render the hedge fill color only for closed ways mapped with
"barrier=hedge" AND "area=yes". This is the recommended way to map a
hedge (or most other features that are usually linear) as an area.

So in case of option 2,
- a closed way that was tagged "barrier=hedge" only will be rendered as a line.
- a closed way tagged as "barrier=hedge" AND "area=yes" will be
rendered with a green fill for the whole area.
- a closed way tagged as "tourism=camp_site" and "barrier=hedge" will
render with a hedge line around the outside, but the campsite color
fill on the inside.
- a closed way (mis-)tagged as "landuse=meadow" and "barrier=hedge"
"AND "area=yes" will render with the green hedge fill for the whole
area, because this is a tagging mistake.

My question to everyone on this forum: does option 2 makes sense to
you as a mapper? Is it less confusing that the current situation
(option 1)

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Graeme Fitzpatrick


On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 at 11:15, Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:

My question to everyone on this forum: does option 2 makes sense to
you as a mapper?

Yep, does to me.

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Joseph Eisenberg


sent from a phone

> On 15. Apr 2019, at 03:14, Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> So in case of option 2,
> - a closed way that was tagged "barrier=hedge" only will be rendered as a line.
> - a closed way tagged as "barrier=hedge" AND "area=yes" will be
> rendered with a green fill for the whole area.


+1


> - a closed way tagged as "tourism=camp_site" and "barrier=hedge" will
> render with a hedge line around the outside, but the campsite color
> fill on the inside.
> - a closed way (mis-)tagged as "landuse=meadow" and "barrier=hedge"
> "AND "area=yes" will render with the green hedge fill for the whole
> area, because this is a tagging mistake.


IMHO these are both tagging mistakes, and the rendering could decide to not render it at all (you don’t know whether the hedge or the other tag is wrong). This would lead very quickly to fixes of the contradicting or ambiguous situations.

Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

Joseph Eisenberg
the rendering could decide to not render it at all [when a closed way is double-tagged with 2 features]

Unfortunately this isn’t feasible.  Normally we render a feature like a fence or hedge in a separate “layer” so that they are on top of certain features like landuse, and below other features like roads. 

We only select the relevant features for each layer: for barriers that’s just things with the key “barrier”, so that rendering does not take too long. If we wanted to change the rendering based on the presence of other features on the same way, we would have to query a long list of features. This is computationally expensive, which is slow and costly for the servers.

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 5:12 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:


sent from a phone

> On 15. Apr 2019, at 03:14, Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> So in case of option 2,
> - a closed way that was tagged "barrier=hedge" only will be rendered as a line.
> - a closed way tagged as "barrier=hedge" AND "area=yes" will be
> rendered with a green fill for the whole area.


+1


> - a closed way tagged as "tourism=camp_site" and "barrier=hedge" will
> render with a hedge line around the outside, but the campsite color
> fill on the inside.
> - a closed way (mis-)tagged as "landuse=meadow" and "barrier=hedge"
> "AND "area=yes" will render with the green hedge fill for the whole
> area, because this is a tagging mistake.


IMHO these are both tagging mistakes, and the rendering could decide to not render it at all (you don’t know whether the hedge or the other tag is wrong). This would lead very quickly to fixes of the contradicting or ambiguous situations.

Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Requiring area=yes with barrier=wall, barrier=hedge and other usually linear features when mapped as an area`1

marc marc
Le 15.04.19 à 11:04, Joseph Eisenberg a écrit :

> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 5:12 PM Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>      > - a closed way tagged as "tourism=camp_site" and "barrier=hedge" will
>      > render with a hedge line around the outside, but the campsite color
>      > fill on the inside.
>      > - a closed way (mis-)tagged as "landuse=meadow" and "barrier=hedge"
>      > "AND "area=yes" will render with the green hedge fill for the whole
>      > area, because this is a tagging mistake.
>
>     IMHO these are both tagging mistakes, and the rendering could decide
>     to not render it at all

 > costly for the servers.

in this case, the least worst would be to not render for the barrier and
only render the 2 elements when they are correctly described (2 objects
or an object with fenced=*).
Correcting an incorrect tag at rendering time will encourage error
instead of encouraging correction
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging