On 12 Mar 2011, at 23:27, Richard Fairhurst wrote: > Thomas Davie wrote: >> Is * expected to be a valid object name in MapCSS too then? > > I think you're overestimating how formalised all of this stuff is so far. ;) > > In general: be CSS-like. If CSS has *, we should have * unless it's clearly > wrong. There are zillions of CSS aficionados across the world; we have to > have a really good reason to go against them.
Agreed – I just wanted to clarify that the implication of the previous email was indeed that "*" should work in MapCSS to mean "any one of node | way | relation | area | line". Your reply seems to confirm that. Thanks Tom Davie _______________________________________________ Mapcss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/mapcss
