Hello all,
the proposal has been approved with 20 pro and 4 contra votes. Thank you
all who took part in the discussion and the vote!
Cheers,
Anne
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
This Proposal includes:
Tags related to snow chains:
* Restrictions on roads regarding snow chains, with optional applying
conditions and if they are variable (not active throughout the whole year)
* Places to put on/off snow chains (which are dedicated and maybe
parking restrictions apply)
Martin's "reply to some unilaterally writing on the key:historic page..." and
"intended to say (something extraordinary) on one end and on the other end
(something vague)" sort of "nudge ahead" this dizzying proposal, but not by
much. I'm not complaining at the extra clarification.
But it
sent from a phone
> On 4 Dec 2022, at 11:41, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> only for features that are considered of historical significance.
intended to say, “of extraordinary historical significance” on the one end, and
the opposing direction is more like “generally somehow related to
sent from a phone
> On 4 Dec 2022, at 10:57, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> "This key can be used on every observable feature that has a historical
> meaning, regardless of ... interest to the OSM community."
I believe this is in reply to some unilaterally writing on the key:historic
page of
This proposal, its history, its present and its future I find extremely
confusing. It is enough for me to vote it down because it needs to be started
from scratch (the proposal itself, not the voting on what is now too confusing
a proposal). If we are re-voting, I'm not even sure I can find
Ah, I see now I put this in my vote on the 2nd voting round. -- I also
see that I asked there why abandoned railways were mentioned since I
thought they had their own key and wern't using "historic", is this an
intentional change? Is the re-tagging of abandoned railways proposed here?
On
Hi,
I could swear I had written this as a public message long ago but I
cannot find it now. Sorry, then, for the last-minute interruption. I had
an issue with the proposal, namely the wording:
"This key can be used on every observable feature that has a historical
meaning, regardless of ...
