On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 6:07 PM, Bryan Housel <bhou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Somebody has already posted a picture to the list of a public phone with > no hood, no booth, and no cover, so > > adding booth=yes to all phones could be an error. > > Are you being deliberately obtuse? > I am not being deliberately obtuse. Accidentally obtuse, perhaps. What you wrote was this: We'll replace all instances of covered=booth with covered=yes I don't see the point of that if we're trying to lose covered=* on phone booths. I thought moving to booth=* was to avoid having covered=* for phones. If it has a booth it's covered so you don't need to tag it as covered. So what am I missing? and add a booth=yes to any features that don't already have a booth tag.” Obviously I parsed it wrong. I parsed it as I split it above, two sequential and independent actions. I wasn't expecting short-circuit evaluation of that particular and expression. -- Paul
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
