Hello people,
since there have been no discussion in the last days, I believe the ideas are
clear enough about the proposal. If you have questions, please post them to the
proposal's talk page, I'll reply promptly (or will try to :)).
In any case, the voting is open:
Hello,
I've moved this proposal to the vote, it has been open for discussion for a
few months and has now been used in the wild for a similar period of time to
see how well it works in practice.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Vegetarian
Recently I found this sign which I interpret as access forbidden to
touristic busses:
http://www.23hq.com/dieterdreist/photo/6610385
It is at a driveway to the local cemetery, near a very popular
monument (unesco world heritage). Do we have to invent another access
tag, or is there already
On 12 April 2011 19:22, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Recently I found this sign which I interpret as access forbidden to
touristic busses:
http://www.23hq.com/dieterdreist/photo/6610385
It is at a driveway to the local cemetery, near a very popular
monument (unesco
2011/4/12 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
My first idea was tourist_bus=no
Why not use access:*=* ?
Usually we tag foot=no instead of access:foot=no, and I don't see why
I should change this standard here.
My question was: which key is used for tourist busses. I couldn't
find them on
On 12 April 2011 20:01, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/4/12 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
My first idea was tourist_bus=no
Why not use access:*=* ?
Usually we tag foot=no instead of access:foot=no, and I don't see why
I should change this standard here.
2011/4/12 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
Why not use access:*=* ?
Usually we tag foot=no instead of access:foot=no, and I don't see why
I should change this standard here.
There is a lot of access:*=* for vehicles, so you would be going against
things.
Where? I can't find them:
On 09/04/2011 15:30, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2011/4/8 Simone Saviolosimone.savi...@gmail.com:
Good idea, but not with etymology as the name. This is not the etymology;
that would be the philological origins of the word.
+1
Here we are talking
about a description of the person the place
2011/4/12 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
On 12 April 2011 20:36, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Where? I can't find them:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dbdouble
Wikipage modified 13 times, in the database 0 (zero) occurrences ;-)
On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 12:01 +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2011/4/12 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
My first idea was tourist_bus=no
Why not use access:*=* ?
Usually we tag foot=no instead of access:foot=no, and I don't see why
I should change this standard here.
To be
On 4/12/11 7:59 PM, David Murn wrote:
On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 12:01 +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2011/4/12 John Smithdeltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
My first idea was tourist_bus=no
Why not use access:*=* ?
Usually we tag foot=no instead of access:foot=no, and I don't see why
I should change
11 matches
Mail list logo
