Sorry, I am continuing to have trouble properly replying to the tagging group,
it keeps defaulting to the individual.
> On Nov 13, 2019, at 4:48 PM, Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> For a levee it can just go around the whole levee
If I understand your suggestion correctly, this is impossible.
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 01:28:04PM -0800, Eric Theise wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 1:17 PM ael wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 01:00:29PM -0800, Eric Theise wrote:
> > > tower:type=communication
> > > tower:construction=concealed
> > >
> > Not really. I mapped such a tower a few year
sent from a phone
> On 13. Nov 2019, at 22:02, Eric Theise wrote:
>
> From my morning reading it seems that entities tagged with
>
> tower:type=communication
> tower:construction=concealed
>
> and either man_made=mast or man_made=tower should cough up cellphone towers
> masquerading as
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 1:17 PM ael wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 01:00:29PM -0800, Eric Theise wrote:
> > tower:type=communication
> > tower:construction=concealed
> >
> > and either man_made=mast or man_made=tower should cough up cellphone
> towers
> > masquerading as cacti, palms, pines
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 01:00:29PM -0800, Eric Theise wrote:
> tower:type=communication
> tower:construction=concealed
>
> and either man_made=mast or man_made=tower should cough up cellphone towers
> masquerading as cacti, palms, pines, flagpoles, and such. But apart from a
> note="pine tree"
Hi everyone,
>From my morning reading it seems that entities tagged with
tower:type=communication
tower:construction=concealed
and either man_made=mast or man_made=tower should cough up cellphone towers
masquerading as cacti, palms, pines, flagpoles, and such. But apart from a
note="pine tre
Am Di., 12. Nov. 2019 um 14:15 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen :
> from the description, light meals aren’t a hard requirement, or it could
>> be seen as satisfied by selling cakes (or ice cream cups in the case of
>> cuisine =ice_cream):
>>
>
> I suspect that, over the years, people have forced things int
Il giorno mar 12 nov 2019 alle ore 23:54 Nick Bolten ha
scritto:
> You make a very good point! A road can have a pedestrian lane, shoulder,
> both, or neither, so it wouldn't make any sense for a pedestrian lane to be
> a type of shoulder. The widths do vary quite a bit as well, regionally.
>
> >
On 11.11.19 09:41, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
if the vehicle class is treated exactly like another one (e.g. pedelec
like a bicycle), I agree there is no need to add an extra key for it, on
the contrary you should not do it (don't tag your local legislation). If
there are differences, we shou
(I mis-sent this email)
> On Nov 13, 2019, at 3:44 AM, Richard wrote:
>
> We need new tags for the bottom of embankmets, top of cuttings, bottom of
> cliffs, earth_banks
> and maybe a few others if we want to map them.
that is very true.
I think we can cleanly do this with the ways you ment
10 matches
Mail list logo
