tomasmarklund75＠gmail.com wrote: > Well, 'ATC' isn't ambigous in Sweden. In Sweden, there is only one ATC, and it > will never be mixed up with japanese or bulgarian ATC.
Does that mean we should also tag Danish, Bulgarian, or Japanese ATC as "Railway:atc=yes"? > And the system IS called ATC, signs along the track say "ATC begins" or > "ATC ends" or similar, documentation for drivers etc say ATC, documentation on > the Trafikverket website says ATC. ATC everywhere, never Ebicab. So it would > be fairly > confusing to tag the railways with something "no one"* has heard of. Because > of > this, I do NOT vote for changing tags in sweden from ATC to Ebicab. If > something has to be > changed, then ATC-SE is a better choise. So why should Danish ATC be tagged ZUB123? All signs say ATC, all driver documentation say ATC, (almost) no-one has heard about ZUB123. Yet that is still the tag used for Denmark. Openrailwaymap mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Archived version of this message: https://lists.openrailwaymap.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/FT7UORLMVTEINFJTC3ICZ4RQ46FRVTYC/ Archive of this list: https://lists.openrailwaymap.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/
