2013/8/14 fly
> Please, stop pleading and either leave the voting open until summer
> break or simply leave it in a proposed state. Voting is not needed to
> get tags approved.
>
anyway there are now 18 votes so the proposal is approved by voting. ;-)
And yes, you can use any tag you like - now
2013/8/14 Tobias
>
>
> Should I better have a proposal instead of this page?
yes, as this is clearly a proposal page, the first tag you mention
(amenity=reuse) has currently not even one occurrence:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=amenity%3Dreuse
cheers,
Martin
__
Am 14.08.2013 16:30, schrieb Tobias:
Hey Tobias
> Here is the newly created page for reuse facilities.
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Reuse
>
> There is some stuff left to improve.
>
> Should I better have a proposal instead of this page?
Yes, please, move the context to proposal and
Am 14.08.2013 11:58, schrieb François Lacombe:
> All we are discussing about here is hypothetical.
> I didn't update the power transmission proposal yet and I'm not sure
> I'll do.
>
> Let's say it's just a big wish.
>
> I think it's dangerous to let the well established stuff prevailing.
> We ha
Am 14.08.2013 08:06, schrieb Georg Feddern:
> Am 14.08.2013 06:06, schrieb Bryce Nesbitt:
>> Would three kind souls take the time to vote at:
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:amenity%3Dtoilets
>>
>> To bring the total to 15 voters?
Please, stop pleading and either leave
Here is the newly created page for reuse facilities.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Reuse
There is some stuff left to improve.
Should I better have a proposal instead of this page?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.op
All we are discussing about here is hypothetical.
I didn't update the power transmission proposal yet and I'm not sure I'll
do.
Let's say it's just a big wish.
I think it's dangerous to let the well established stuff prevailing.
We had this problem on power=line, now on power=pole/tower (not to m
Il giorno 14/ago/2013, alle ore 01:40, Greg Troxel ha scritto:
> Chris Hill writes:
>
>> I would prefer that you didn't pretend we will deprecate a tag so
>> widely used just so a small proportion of them can have another power
>> tag on it when we can easily just add transformer=yes or somet
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 10:59 AM, François Lacombe
wrote:
> Should I take care of power=transformer, transformer=yes,
> transformer:power:tower=yes, power:tower:transformer=yes,
> transformer=distribution ?
On the wiki, you should document that the transformer is either mapped
for itself with "p
Hi guys, many thanks for your answers.
@Martin :
It would be ok since man_made=tower is dedicated to more particular
structures than common power towers.
What about man_made=power_tower ?
We would move all tag from tower:* namespace to power_tower:* too (for
design, type, colors...)
@Pieren
I kn
it is fairly self explanatory and is in common usage, ngo that means nothing to
me.
Phil (trigpoint)
--
Sent from my Nokia N9
On 13/08/2013 18:07 Volker Schmidt wrote:
There is another frequently used value in the same category: office=ngo
Want to change that as well?
I am unsure how strict
Am 13.08.2013 20:41 schrieb "Bryce Nesbitt" :
>
> And a trickier example: a camp complex with four buildings, all with a
name=.
> At lower zoom levels which building's name should show? The rendering
> needs a hint to know what "name=Camp Office" is of broader interest than
"name=Maintenance Shed
2013/8/13 Pieren
> That's why I would like to change the wiki to e.g.
> "office=information_technology" and check (on talk list) if it can be
> changed in the database as well for the 852 instances (from ~440
> contributors).
> Your opinion ?
>
+1. IMHO abbreviations should be avoided whenever p
13 matches
Mail list logo
