Re: [Talk-GB] natural=tree

2010-11-18 Thread Andy Allan
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:17 PM, Andrew Ainsworth andrew.ainswo...@gmail.com wrote: I've just noticed that every tree has been edited by a bot recently, adding tags such as denotation=cluster and fixme=set better denotation? What a stupid thing to do (and denotation is a stupid word to use

[Talk-GB] Stupid tags (was: natural=tree)

2010-11-18 Thread Ed Avis
Andy Allan gravityst...@... writes: What a stupid thing to do (and denotation is a stupid word to use too). Thanks, that gave me a good laugh. I think we can add denotation=cluster to the tagging hall of shame alongside smoothness=very_horrible. Any others? -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com

Re: [Talk-GB] Stupid tags (was: natural=tree)

2010-11-18 Thread Nick Whitelegg
What a stupid thing to do (and denotation is a stupid word to use too). Thanks, that gave me a good laugh. I think we can add denotation=cluster to the tagging hall of shame alongside smoothness=very_horrible. Any others? Not sure, but an anagram of denotation would be an appropriate thing

Re: [Talk-GB] Stupid tags

2010-11-18 Thread Ian Spencer
Nick Whitelegg wrote on 18/11/2010 11:20: What a stupid thing to do (and "denotation" is a stupid word to use too). Thanks, that gave me a good laugh. I think we can add denotation=cluster to the tagging

Re: [Talk-GB] natural=tree

2010-11-18 Thread Andrew Ainsworth
I've not got any experience in reverting entire changesets (or large sets of changesets). How is the best way to approach this and who should be the one to do it? Ainsworth On 18 November 2010 09:40, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:17 PM, Andrew Ainsworth

Re: [Talk-GB] Anyone in/near Horsham who can map a missing key link?

2010-11-18 Thread Jonathan Bennett
On 18/11/2010 12:55, Martin wrote: We've had some feedback which indicates there is a missing link that enables cyclists to avoid a nasty roundabout over the A24 joining Horsham with Broadbridge Heath. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.06709lon=-0.35466zoom=17layers=M The link basically

Re: [Talk-GB] Stupid tags

2010-11-18 Thread Dave F.
On 18/11/2010 11:03, Ed Avis wrote: Andy Allangravityst...@... writes: What a stupid thing to do (and denotation is a stupid word to use too). Thanks, that gave me a good laugh. I think we can add denotation=cluster to the tagging hall of shame alongside smoothness=very_horrible. Any

Re: [Talk-GB] Stupid tags

2010-11-18 Thread Jonathan Bennett
On 18/11/2010 19:36, Dave F. wrote: There are too many to list, but whilst this is topical, I have a minor problem with natural=*. It's far too general. I mean, everything under the sun is either natural or man made. Also historical=* is just too subjective to be useful. Everything, by

Re: [Talk-GB] Stupid tags

2010-11-18 Thread Dave F.
On 18/11/2010 20:07, Jonathan Bennett wrote: On 18/11/2010 19:36, Dave F. wrote: There are too many to list, but whilst this is topical, I have a minor problem with natural=*. It's far too general. I mean, everything under the sun is either natural or man made. Also historical=* is just too

Re: [Talk-GB] Stupid tags

2010-11-18 Thread Jonathan Bennett
On 18/11/2010 20:18, Dave F. wrote: If key tags don't mean anything, why have them? It's a quirk of the way tagging works more than anything. We need key-value tags for properties like name=* and oneway=* and there's no point in having two separate tagging systems for class type tags and