Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #13877, comment 16


Ignore:
Timestamp:
2016-11-01T18:25:52+01:00 (9 years ago)
Author:
Klumbumbus

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • Ticket #13877, comment 16

    initial v1  
    1 OK, we should exclude objects with `area=no` and `attraction=*` to avoid false positives like [osmwww:way/175034247] or [osmwww:way/192657911]. However it seems we can't avoid a few false positives for e.g. [osmwww:way/114691942] or [osmwww:way/225105909]. (The last example is actually mapped wrong, but it could be a false positive if the multipolygon wouldn't be present.)
     1OK, we should exclude objects with `area=no` or `attraction=*` to avoid false positives like [osmwww:way/175034247] or [osmwww:way/192657911]. However it seems we can't avoid a few false positives for e.g. [osmwww:way/114691942] or [osmwww:way/225105909]. (The last example is actually mapped wrong, but it could be a false positive if the multipolygon wouldn't be present.)