highway=pedestrian + area=yes overlaps other features

[naoliv]

Sorry if it's duplicate (I didn't find another issue for this).

Using a highway=pedestrian + area=yes seems to overlaps other smaller features/objects in area.
For example, here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/347397569#map=19/-24.02485/-46.45930&layers=D
The barrier=wall isn't rendered.

This building neither: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/347397894
pitch: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/347397648
water: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/347397645
etc

Shouldn't they appear on top of the highway area?

[dieterdreist]

Am 26.05.2015 um 13:44 schrieb Nelson A. de Oliveira notifications@github.com:

The barrier=wall isn't rendered.

rendering bug IMHO

This building neither: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/347397894
pitch: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/347397648
water: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/347397645
etc

these are mapping bugs IMHO, as none of them is a pedestrian area they should be excluded (MP)

[naoliv]

But isn't it similar to have a full area mapped with landuse=grass or natural=grassland with a building, water or something else on it?

[HolgerJeromin]

this is probably #688

[matthijsmelissen]

Duplicate with #688 and #528.

[dieterdreist]

Am 26.05.2015 um 13:55 schrieb Nelson A. de Oliveira notifications@github.com:

But isn't it similar to have a full area mapped with landuse=grass or natural=grassland with a building, water or something else on it?

it depends on the meaning of the tags, inside a grassland you might find all kind of other things while I'd read landuse=grass as a surface with grass where I would expect buildings or water to be cut out

[naoliv]

I'd read landuse=grass as a surface with grass where I would expect buildings or water to be cut out

Sure, it makes sense (and I also agree that the mapping could be improved in OSM), but it's not how I see most people mapping here in Brazil (ie, they draw a big area (a park, natural=something, landuse, etc) and then the other small objects on top of it, without using any kind of relation to represent the inners and outers.

[dieterdreist]

Am 26.05.2015 um 19:08 schrieb Nelson A. de Oliveira notifications@github.com:

it's not how I see most people mapping here in Brazil (ie, they draw a big area (a park, natural=something, landuse, etc) and then the other small objects on top of it, without using any kind of relation to represent the inners and outers.

for a park it is rare to have holes

[naoliv]

Shouldn't churchs, for example, be a hole in the park?

[dieterdreist]

Am 26.05.2015 um 19:15 schrieb Nelson A. de Oliveira notifications@github.com:

Shouldn't churchs, for example, be a hole in the park?

if they are in the park I'd say not, if you have to leave the park then yes ;-)
I've never seen a church in the park (well, maybe it can happen with villas, gardens of castles etc. and in these cases I'd keep them in)