Request to restore rendering for highway=track + area=yes

[bgo-eiu]

Expected behavior

At the moment, some values of highway may be rendered as areas, while others may not. Most notably, pedestrian streets and service roads. There has historically been some confusion about why a highway would be mapped as an area, but as I understand it the reason to render this for service roads is that some of them are not navigated linearly and can be used for maneuvering in any direction. I think the same is true for track roads, but these no longer render.

Actual behavior

highway=track only renders for linear ways.

Screenshots with links illustrating the problem

If you take a look at the grey-ish blob here on the right in the satellite imagery, that was created by vehicles maneuvering around on it in the same way that the linear tracks which have been mapped here were made. I would say it makes sense to show that area as a solid fill of the track color.

[imagico]

Rendering has been removed in #4096.

Updated info compared to 2020 (#4096 (review)):

type	count	area=yes + MP relations	wiki documenting use on polygons
track	23M	4900 + 250	no

[BubbaJuice]

If this is to be rendered area:highway=track should be rendered instead of highway=track + area=yes. The area:highway key is more widely accepted for highway areas.

[imagico]

This is about about rendering of polygons tagged highway=track. Rendering of features tagged area:highway=* is covered in #180.

[bgo-eiu]

area:highway and highway + area=yes are not the same thing - the former is for mapping the area of linear the ways, the latter is for ways navigable as areas.

[bgo-eiu]

For what it's worth, this is a real but relatively rare feature in real life. This particular area is a brownfield which used to be a residential area before all the buildings were razed - in most cities something like this would be removed or replaced, but the amount of areas that look like this in my city increases year to year. So if the number of features mapped the prevalence on the ground, this would be one which might be decreasing in most places but increasing in a few. Usually you can't just drive around in circles on a tract of land enough to make shapes like this in the middle of a city but here this happens

[BubbaJuice]

area:highway and highway + area=yes are not the same thing - the former is for mapping the area of linear the ways, the latter is for ways navigable as areas.

I am aware. I am just saying, the rendering of area:highway should be added before or along with this rendering, as it is more widely mapped and much more common.

I would also say that turning areas like this could just be area:highway along with on the track way a turning circle.

[bgo-eiu]

How widely something is mapped has nothing to do with whether or not it should be rendered in carto. I myself have added more area:highway features to the map than track areas and do not wish to see those rendered because they represent information that is better suited to a niche map or simply for downloading direct from the database. (I use it for information like recording how the curb shape has been rebuilt in the time since the most recent aerial imagery along a linear road.)

This is not an example of area:highway so there is no reason to have it rendered as that.

[BubbaJuice]

How widely something is mapped has nothing to do with whether or not it should be rendered in carto.

#4473 (comment)

I thought this was an example of area:highway because I misunderstood the "gray blob".
What I thought was the grey blob:

An example of what I was talking about that would classify as area:highway: