Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Education 2.0

I think this proposal is quite elaborate and could be useful (with some modifications) as a kind of summary page to find useful tags for a particular school to be tagged as. It also contains useful concepts how additional detail could be added in a formalized way. But I don't think this is somethin

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Education 2.0

I have made clarifications about current tags on proposal page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Education_2.0#Current_tagging_system Since education=* tags just duplicate amenity=school, college etc, they fit proposal well. Subtags like *education*:students_female

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Education 2.0

Some of this tags has analogues in proposal, but in proposal they are put in the system. nursery=yes - could this tag be just replaced with min_age or education_level from proposal? after_school in proposal it is educational_form:fulltime_extended preschools is obviously refers to education_leve

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Education 2.0

just some other tags that are related to this proposal - amenity=driving_school http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Ddriving_school do you keep this one for backwards compatibility ? - leisure=dance + dance:teaching=yes do you replace de dance:teaching ? - amenity=music_school ht

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - shop=boat (supersedes shop=marine, shop=*chandler, etc)

On 2016-04-12 04:12:03, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2016-04-12 9:35 GMT+02:00 Malcolm Herring > : > > shop=boat is a bad choice for marine/chandlery stores. A better > tag is shop=boat_supplies as this more completely describes the > type of store. Few chandleries sell actual boats, so

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - shop=boat (supersedes shop=marine, shop=*chandler, etc)

@anarcat, It is frustrating to try to achieve consensus, especially when people pop in with new ideas now and again. I want to thank you for your work on this project. I liked the original tag you suggested and for my own work will probably use it seeing as there are no rules about such behavior a

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Education 2.0

I assume that tags related to education that have been approved and do not have "education" key should remain (not sure what to do with unapproved tags). ISCED level already is in he proposal, however I propose this tag as optional. 13.04.2016 22:15, Marc Gemis пишет: just some other tags tha