sent from a phone
> On 25. Jun 2020, at 19:59, pangoSE <pang...@riseup.net> wrote: > > There are some image= tags that link to multiple images separated by ";". > These will be manually migrated to contain only one image that is not linking > to commons and the rest in a note, note1, noteX if multiple urls. there might be an issue with multiple images separated by ; because the semicolon does not have to be escaped in URLs. If the protocol is given every time it might still be ok? e.g. http://111.com/example1.jpg;http://111.com/example2.jpg would be unambiguous because you cannot have // in the middle of a filename, or can you? Generally, putting additional image urls in the note tag does not seem to be an improvement. Why “note” and “note1”, rather than for example “image1”? Note does not have a semantic meaning that makes it suitable for image urls. If I was right in the previous paragraph and the semicolon followed by a protocol is unambiguous, we should rather keep these as they are. Cheers Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
