Subject renamed for clarity. * leaving it as it is - easy choice * Adding dump_station to waste= - consistent with whats there now. * Adding dump_station to amenity= - easier to map (?) >> ...I vote for the middle option: waste=dump_station
On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 11:31 +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > semantically this sounds as if dump_station was a kind > of waste, not a place type to put waste > amenity=dump_station or man_made=dump_station > would be the obvious ones. > Thats a very good point Martin, a dump station is not a "waste" but it is an amenity. That does differentiate it from much of the the other items listed under waste=. We tend to use the name for the waste itself in many cases but, I guess because of its nature, prefer to name the facility rather than say "excrement", "sh**", whatever. Quite a good argument for elevating the proposed dump_station to amenity rather than waste= in my opinion. Thanks Martin David _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
