Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways - the — separation character

2012-10-11 Thread Alexander
On 2012-10-10T22:38:34+02:00, Colin Smale wrote: On 10/10/2012 21:53, Alexander wrote: Hi, I think the separation sign should be chosen by the renderer. +1 Why not adding new tags like: name:left=Mexico name:right=USA -1 This looks to me like blatant tagging for the renderer, i.e.

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways

2012-10-10 Thread A.Pirard.Papou
Hi, Thank you for your replies. Based on what you said, I projected a small rework of the Belgian configuration. I'm discussing the options here and I'd appreciate your technical approval before I suggest this option. I prefer to limit the discussion to what is needed to make the practical

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways - the — separation character

2012-10-10 Thread sly (sylvain letuffe)
Q1e2 : However I don't like using some strange caracters my keyboard does'nt have like — Strange you mention that. (...) Then I noticed that municipality names I wrote were being changed without discussing them and without warning. It turned out that those changes were made by a

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways

2012-10-10 Thread sly (sylvain letuffe)
You mean like this http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/111 When I suggested the route recursion solution (a too restrictive concept), I was replied (by some Frenchman) that it's impossible. Mmmm ? I would be interested to know who told you that. Such a solution was

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways - the — separation character

2012-10-10 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2012/10/10 sly (sylvain letuffe) li...@letuffe.org: words) on which he replied that I was the only one arguing against and that every one was happy with a — instead of more common characters like / - or whatever. I think that - is not a good choice because there are some places that already

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways - the — separation character

2012-10-10 Thread Alexander
Hi, I think the separation sign should be chosen by the render. Why not adding new tags like: name:left=Mexico name:right=USA this would also enable developers to render the border like this: http://fissl.com/border.svg Cheers On 2012-10-10T21:26:43+02:00, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways - the — separation character

2012-10-10 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2012/10/10 Alexander a...@fissl.com: I think the separation sign should be chosen by the render. +1 Why not adding new tags like: name:left=Mexico name:right=USA yes, we already do this in Italy. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways - the — separation character

2012-10-10 Thread Eckhart Wörner
Hi Alexander, Am Mittwoch, 10. Oktober 2012, 21:53:42 schrieb Alexander: Why not adding new tags like: name:left=Mexico name:right=USA this would also enable developers to render the border like this: http://fissl.com/border.svg Really? You need the whole outline (i.e. the relation) to

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways - the — separation character

2012-10-10 Thread Colin Smale
On 10/10/2012 21:53, Alexander wrote: Hi, I think the separation sign should be chosen by the render. +1 Why not adding new tags like: name:left=Mexico name:right=USA -1 This looks to me like blatant tagging for the renderer, i.e. manipulating the tagging to produce an optically

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways - the — separation character ... or without any

2012-10-10 Thread A.Pirard
PS: I notice before sending that replying in 2 lines is faster ;-) On 2012-10-10 21:26, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote : 2012/10/10 sly (sylvain letuffe) li...@letuffe.org: words) on which he replied that I was the only one arguing against and that every one was happy with a — instead of more

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways

2012-10-05 Thread A.Pirard.Papou
I'm resending this because the lists, which are tables, are garbage in the log. The source of the HTML message is displayed (unformatted). I complained, but they replied that my complaint is invalid !!! (Shouldn't we open a freely accessible Gmail account to log the list?) Sorry for the noise.

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways

2012-10-04 Thread sylvain letuffe
Frederik Ramm wrote You mean like this http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/111 or this http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/11980 (...) That would work for situations like the first example but not for the second where individual sub-regions have been collected

Re: [Tagging] Naming boundary ways

2012-10-04 Thread sly (sylvain letuffe)
I had assumed it was constructed differently but maybe it isn't. ok It might, but if it does, it shouldn't as it would be an error as far as what we have documented for it is concerned. But since one french contributor has decided against all others's will and local practices to change as he