On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:57:08PM +0200, Stephan Bösch-Plepelits wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:16:52PM +0200, Tom Davie wrote:
> > On 16 Sep 2013, at 21:32, Stephan Bösch-Plepelits
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > 1. Unary tests
> > > --------------
> > > The MapCSS 0.2 specification[1] says the following about unary tests:
> > > way[highway] /* Matches against all ways with the highway tag set
> > > */
> > > way[!highway] /* Matches against all ways with the highway tag not
> > > set (or set to no/false) */
> > >
> > > Question: Wouldn't it be more logical if the first statement does not
> > > match ways with the highway tag set to no or false?
> > No, you can already test for that with way[highway=false], you can’t test
> > for the tag not existing any other way.
> You contradict the specification in your statement, because the test for a
> non-existing tag also matches 'no' and 'false' (as cited above).
Let me rephrase: Does someone oppose that I change "way[!highway]" to
"Matches against all ways with the highway tag not set".
resp. remove "(or set to no/false)"
greetings,
Stephan
--
Seid unbequem, seid Sand, nicht Öl im Getriebe der Welt! - Günther Eich
,---------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Stephan Bösch-Plepelits, |
| Technische Universität Wien - Studien Informatik & Raumplanung |
| Projects: |
| > openstreetbrowser.org > couchsurfing.org > tubasis.at > bl.mud.at |
| Contact: |
| > Mail: [email protected] > Blog: plepe.at |
| > Twitter: twitter.com/plepe > Jabber: [email protected] |
`---------------------------------------------------------------------'
_______________________________________________
Mapcss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/mapcss
