Be more conservative when including leisure=garden/commons #3857
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
These are mostly private gardens and small streches of green not of interest for a general search. ddd
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There is lots of private backyard micro-mapping going on in the UK, where the whole plot is being mapped as
leisure=garden. Example near Birmingham. This interferes badly with reverse geocoding because gardens are still indexed as POIs at the moment.This excludes all unnamed gardens, assuming they are private and not of much general interest. It also moves
leisure=garden,leisure=commonsandleisure=nature_reservein to the "manmade" layer, which means they won't show up by default in reverse geocoding anymore.