Render building with ruins=yes differently

[valhentai]

ruins=yes is not taken into account for rendering.

A building with ruins=yes could be rendered with dashed border or/and stripped fill to show that the building is not a complete building.

This is the rendering of historic=ruins in OsmAnd. We could render building=⁎ and ruins=yes in a similar way.

[matkoniecz]

"Add rendering for historic=ruins" is covered by #331

[valhentai]

@matkoniecz I edited the issue to leave only the ruins=yes part.

[matthijsmelissen]

Do you have an example how you you would use this tagging? amenity=pub+ruins=yes? amenity=place_of_worship + ruins=yes? Doesn't seem like particular good tagging.

[dieterdreist]

sent from a phone

Am 21.03.2016 um 09:43 schrieb math1985 [email protected]:

Do you have an example how you you would use this tagging? amenity=pub+ruins=yes? amenity=place_of_worship + ruins=yes?

ruins are likely buildings or similar structures (walls, retaining_walls, monuments, towers, castles, bunkers, bridges, surveillance stations, dams,...), so neither of the above examples makes sense (they are describing functions ).

What about ruins=foo ? It's used much less, but still has more than the occasional occurrence it would have if used by just a handful of mappers: http://taginfo.osm.org/keys/ruins#values

Another scheme in use is ruins:building=* (but even fewer uses)

[valhentai]

The ruins tag wiki say that historic=ruin should be used when there is no more specific tag to use. else ruins=yes should be used.
The most frequent example is a castle (historic=castle) which could be in good state or in ruins.
The historical object map use the tag ruins=yes to render the icon differently if the building is a ruin.

[dieterdreist]

sent from a phone

Am 21.03.2016 um 10:00 schrieb valhentai [email protected]:

The ruins tag wiki say that historic=ruin should be used when there is no more specific tag to use

there will always be a more specific tag if not for the very few occasions where it is completely unknown what the structure was (unlikely), and even these cases will typically be archaeological sites (already a generic tag for these). By introducing and supporting overly generic tags we will slow down the creation of tags that better describe the thing.

[valhentai]

The ruins=yes has to be used with a specific tag. not alone.
for example historic=castle + ruins=yes where castle is the specific tag.
The probleme with historic=castle is that it exlude historic=ruins. So without ruins=yes, the information "This castle is in ruins" can't be added.

[dieterdreist]

sent from a phone

Am 21.03.2016 um 10:33 schrieb valhentai [email protected]:

The probleme with historic=castle is that it exlude historic=ruins. So without ruins=yes, the information "This castle is in ruins" can't be added.

historic=ruins
ruins=castle

[valhentai]

In my second comment, I was awsering the comment before your.
I have the impression you thought I was opposing to your awnser but i was not. I completly agree with
ruins=foo.
I just see a problem in the case of castles. I think someone doing a query on historic=castle expect to get castle in ruins too.
with historic=castle and ruins=castle, queries on castle or ruins can work

[dieterdreist]

Am 21.03.2016 um 12:11 schrieb valhentai [email protected]:

with historic=castle and ruins=castle, queries on castle or ruins can work

+1, I was referring to the original demand to render ruins=yes. Modifiers of this kind (additional tags that significantly change the meaning of other tags as opposed to just refining them) are generally bad (similar cases are disused/abandoned/destroyed/removed/dismantled/functional/working/...=yes/no) and should not be "endorsed" by picking them up

The historic key is somehow special anyway, as it already bears a relationship with the past in it.

[valhentai]

My idea was to modify the rendering of building=⁎ when there is a tag ruins=⁎.

it will be used like this
building=yes , ruins=restaurant or ruins:amenity=restaurant
But not
amenity=restaurant , ruins=yes

[dieterdreist]

sent from a phone

Am 21.03.2016 um 14:14 schrieb valhentai [email protected]:

building=yes ,
ruins=restaurant or ruins:amenity=restaurant

As the tagging is apparently not yet settled this should be discussed on the tagging mailing list, not here

[pnorman]

building=yes ruins=yes is similar to the case of disused=yes, which as a matter of policy, we do not use.

From the OpenStreetMap Carto perspective, building=yes ruins=yes is a building, so is rendered like other buildings.