On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 5:59 AM, John Smith wrote:
> Personally I think historic=yes isn't a good idea, since you have to
> do further digging to be able to classify things, where as stipulating
> why it's historic is of much better value.
>
>
"historic=event" needs also further digging...
Pieren
I announce on behalf of Federico Cozzi that voting is open for
service:bicycle
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/service:bicycle
cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinf
Am 01.05.2011 um 15:13 schrieb Stefan Bethke:
> Am 01.05.2011 um 13:14 schrieb Sebastian Hohmann:
>
>> Am 29.04.2011 22:18, schrieb Stefan Bethke:
>>> It appears that people have been using "car" as a key for this
>>> purpose. Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below
>>> motorcar=*?
I think it is what it is, adding a subtag such as robbery or
battlefield etc but I already documented this on the wiki
On 5/3/11, Pieren wrote:
> On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 5:59 AM, John Smith wrote:
>
>> Personally I think historic=yes isn't a good idea, since you have to
>> do further digging to be
Am 03.05.2011 um 11:56 schrieb Stefan Bethke:
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Car_access_tag
I've updated the draft with concrete verbiage to be added/changed on the access
and Map features pages.
Stefan
--
Stefan BethkeFon +49 151 14070811
This probably should belong on tagging, so I've cc'ed it there, also
you could add to the talk page.
That's a good question, and something I've thought about recently as
well. I've really liked the footway=crossing tag, even more so than
footway=sidewalk, so I've started using path=crossing as wel
