Totally agree. More over, every time you use the symbol ":" in your tag, you
mean that the subtag is telling something more specific about the maintag
thats in front of it.
This methode should be introduced more widely all over OSM to avoid annoying
new and unnesseccerry tags or values.
Robert
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
From: dies38...@mypacks.net
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 12:00 AM
To: Tagging OSM
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Why addr:state rather than is_in:state? (response to
2010-12-26 05:29:46)
(from ceyockey) I am of the opinion that "addr:state" should only be used in
the context of an address, not as a standalone synonym for "is_in:state",
meaning that I support the use of "is_in:state" for routes.
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ceyockey)
==ORIGINAL BELOW==
From: Nathan Edgars II
Subject: Why addr:state rather than is_in:state?
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap.tagging,
gmane.comp.gis.openstreetmap.region.us
Date: 2010-12-26 05:29:46 GMT (2 days, 17 hours and 26 minutes ago)
Many route relations use addr:state to describe what state the route
is in. Should a tag intended for addresses be used this way, or is
is_in:state a better tag to use?
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tekst ingevoegd door Panda GP 2011:
Als het hier gaat om een ongevraagde e-mail (SPAM), klik dan op de volgende
link om de e-mail te herclasseren:
http://localhost:6083/Panda?ID=pav_1235&SPAM=true&path=C:\Windows\system32\config\systemprofile\AppData\Local\Panda%20Security\Panda%20Global%20Protection%202011\AntiSpam
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
