Thinking up possible uses of seemingly-frivolous data is always fun.

There’s the obvious ones like “better renders” but, to use roof colors as an example, maybe some researcher in the future wants to evaluate something like the relationship between energy costs and roof colors, to see how much of an impact darker/lighter roofs have on heating and cooling costs and, based on the climate of an area, what range of colors is ideal. Who knows?

Thank you so much for sharing this great write-up! I really appreciate it.

Thanks for sharing! :)

This is slightly different than the information I added to osm.wiki/HDYC - do you have a source for your numbers?

Thanks for sharing this (the style and the process) - I need to make a few of my own!

You might find the discussion on this recent blog post interesting: @rphyrin/diary/406378

In short - “Mistagging for a renderer” is bad, yes, but even highly detailed 3D micromapping with lots of building:parts is perfectly fine, so long as the data is truthful.

That sounds good to me :)

Do you think adding “mistagging for a renderer” to the first line is appropriate?

from:

“Tagging for the renderer”, also known as “lying to the renderer”, is the bad practice of using incorrect tags […]

to:

“Tagging for the renderer”, also known as “mistagging for a renderer” or “lying to the renderer”, is the bad practice of using incorrect tags […]

I also very much dislike the PTv2 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name conventions - I went with Route <ref>: <destination> for the public transport routes in WA.

I was similarly mistaken at first; I think “Mistagging for a renderer” is more in line with the spirit of the idea that the “Mapping for the renderer” phrase actually refers to.

I use Overpass Turbo on a daily basis, and it’s wonderful to see these developments. Thanks for your work!