mmmm i understand that, i was giving a less 'political' example, because
if the OP feels they shouldn't be mapped, then discussion needs to be
sensitive too. i meant more not mentioning them specifically here... for
the same reason in the sentence before.
On 08/17/18 00:31, Warin wrote:
On 17/08/18 08:25, seirra wrote:
i did originally mean more for example if an area is known for a
specific crime... listing it there? for example where a friend of
mine lives they say if someone sees your phone it gets stolen? so
safety:phone=no could be a good example? i can think of other
examples such as specific streets patrolled at night due to known
criminal activity (which should be tagged with the specific crime,
because otherwise it's no use to anyone),
The areas I am thinking of .. your life is at risk. Forget money,
phones.. your very life.
but given OP's expressed issues on the matter i figure it's best not
to mention them specifically
If your going to map them .. then they will be public.
On 08/16/18 23:14, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 17. Aug 2018, at 00:09, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
wrote:
What, like tax avoidance and insider dealing?
I believe he’s more after corruption and abuse of institutional power.
Cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
