coz it makes me think of no=yes and that would just be silly
On 9 Jun 2008, at 12:43, 80n wrote: > noname=yes seems like a perfectly good solution. Why do you think > it might not be optimal? > > On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 10:25 AM, SteveC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I didn't find much on the wiki, has anyone looked at defining streets > without names? > > I'd like to define some roads that really don't have a name so that > they drop off the noname map. > > http://dev.openstreetmap.org/~random/no-names/ > > I've been adding noname:yes but I can see that might not be optimal. > Maybe name:__none__. Or something. > > Best > > Steve > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk > Best Steve _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
