Re: [Tagging] Inconsistent road refs

On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 9:49 PM, Paul Norman wrote: > There is a stretch of local highway which used to be signed with a ref, > but no longer is. On the other hand, most of the intersecting roads still > show that this highway has the old ref. Some other parts of the road remain

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

2016-02-03 6:57 GMT+01:00 althio : > In more details: > > For museums, including art museums (collection of works): > tourism = museum > + museum = art / railway / history / ... > + art = painting / photography / ... > [no tourism = gallery] > I'd prefer amenity=museum,

Re: [Tagging] Inconsistent road refs

2016-02-03 4:49 GMT+01:00 Paul Norman : > There is a stretch of local highway which used to be signed with a ref, > but no longer is. On the other hand, most of the intersecting roads still > show that this highway has the old ref. Some other parts of the road remain > signed. >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

2016-02-02 23:17 GMT+01:00 Max : > > both, the two examples above, as the first two examples on the link, > > clearly show that the word gallery has multiple meanings: > > > > * Many galleries display the art prints without prices - hoping to get > > more easily

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Discourage tourism=gallery

On 2016년 02월 03일 10:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > I'd prefer amenity=museum, but I see that putting it under the tourism > key is quite established so it would have to be discussed if a change > would make sense (if it hurts less to do this change one and forever or > if it is better to bear