On 12 June 2011 02:33, Serge Wroclawski <emac...@gmail.com> wrote: > The problem with these types of proposals, of N levels of depth of a > tag, is that they quickly become complex, and thus get unused. > > You, Dr. Who, are proposing changing shop=pets to now: > > shop=pets > animals:fish=yes > > and > > shop=pets > animals=no
There is a good reason I mentioned fish, they seem to be the only pets/animals sold in some shops these days. > The logical conclusion is: > > shop=pets > animals:cats=yes > animals:reptiles=gecko;snakes > supplies:cat_food=dry;canned > supplies:fish=block;flakes;filters;nets > supplies:fish:treasure_chest=no > ... I don't see a problem with this except to prove your point you made things excessively specific, but I don't see a problem with more general forms, how is this any different than tagging the types of fuel sold at amenity=fuel? _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
