2015-03-18 11:52 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić <jan...@gmail.com>: > if that toilet is tagged with amenity=toilets it is a tagging error and >> the tag should be fixed or the object completely removed. The toilets tag >> is for "toilet[s] open to the public". >> > > Well, it is a toilet, and it is an amenity, although a private one. So why > not private:amenity=* or maybe amenity:private=* ? >
yes, you could do that (I doubt it will be something a lot of mappers will map, at least not around here), my comment was referring to your question "we don't want people being routed to the nearest toilet that is actually inside a power plant. How do we fix this?". If either approach is used (not mapping at all, or prefixing "private"), than we will not have to fix anything, I just wanted to point out that already at the status quo, mapping a private toilet inside a power plant with amenity=toilets is an error. > > Also that scheme would require really a lot of tags to be added because it >> seems it doesn't rely on inheritance from encompassing objects. >> > > What new tags do you speak of? I didn't quite understand. Did you mean we > should invent an access=* tag that is by it's nature inherited from > encompassing objects? > It would require us to add operator tags to every single object inside another object with the same operator tag, if I got you right. Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
