> I’ve read that whole previous discussion, and from my point of view it was just a whole bunch of completely useless noise, with everyone telling you that you aren’t making sense and you ignoring it and bulldozing your way forward.
Ah, and incidentally, I'd say I have the exact opposite problem: I reply to just about every single thread, quoting just about everything and attempting to take it into consideration. Let's try to make this a productive discussion, not one laden with (for some reason primarily German-speaking-originating) disdain. On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 10:20 PM Nick Bolten <nbol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > if you are having trouble where people are “fixing” your mapping, then > draw a way with no highway=* tag put crossing=no on it. > > Is this an established strategy? I'd be happy to promote it + update the > wiki if it's communally supported. If it's not necessarily an established > strategy, I'd also be interested in making a new thread about it in the > hopes of making it one. > > On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 10:09 PM John Willis via Tagging < > tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> On May 20, 2019, at 9:52 AM, Nick Bolten <nbol...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Unfortunately, people will draw the crossing if there isn't negative >> information there saying to stop doing that, e.g. crossing=no >> >> >> if you are having trouble where people are “fixing” your mapping, then >> draw a way with no highway=* tag >> >> put crossing=no on it. that should at least read as “mapped” to imagery >> tracers out there. >> >> similar to demolished=* on a line mapped over a bridge visible on imagery >> that has actually been destroyed. >> >> Javbw >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
