Garden on top of a building

[sabas]

Currently leisure=garden on top of a building is invisible.
Here's some examples
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/133139256#map=19/44.40438/8.93088

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23569728#map=19/44.40549/8.93229

Perhaps it could be solved by #565

[matthijsmelissen]

See also #53.

[matthijsmelissen]

I think this is out of the scope of #565.

[23cpo]

In my opinion this isn't an issue. Buildings are a much more important feature also for the readability of the map and should be preferred for the rendering. Transparency for leisure=garden may be a solution.

[dieterdreist]

Il giorno 23/ago/2014, alle ore 17:07, 23cpo notifications@github.com ha scritto:

Transparency for leisure=garden may be a solution.

transparency leads to unreadable maps, I have a case here with a pitch and a swimming pool on top of a supermarket, the rendering doesn't really permit to recognize these:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/41.82829/12.47879

[matkoniecz]

On general purpose map building is more important in this case.

[pnorman]

Putting buildings under amenities is, obviously, not an option. We could theoretically put them on the same layer and let painter's work it out, but I'm skeptical about that, and it'd also make what is already the most complex layer completely unmaintainable.

Transparency for leisure=garden would do nothing, as it's rendered under the building.

[sabas]

So in this case
https://m.flickr.com/#/photos/127068989@N08/14988561902/
it is a garden or a pedestrian? or both?

[dieterdreist]

Il giorno 28/ago/2014, alle ore 11:44, sabas notifications@github.com ha scritto:

So in this case
https://m.flickr.com/#/photos/127068989@N08/14988561902/
it is a garden or a pedestrian? or both?

I definitely wouldn't call that a garden.

[matkoniecz]

Not a garden.