W dniu 20.01.2016 23:17, moltonel 3x Combo napisał(a):
Concerning your suggestion to use "name=n1 alt_name=n2;n3", let me
rethorically wonder why you didn't suggest "name=n1;n2;n3" ? I expect
it is because the risk of semicolons in the "name" tag catching some
consumers unaware. Well, that risk
On 17/01/2016, Hakuch wrote:
> for me the use of alt_name_1 is more logical than the name_1, because
> alt_name is the meaning of name_1! So, if you have a second name and you
> dont know where to put it (loc_name, old_name...) you can use alt_name.
> And if you have a third name you SHOULD use al
On 20/01/2016 05:30, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Ralph Aytoun
mailto:ralph.ayt...@ntlworld.com>> wrote:
New mappers have a lot to learn. They have enough of a problem
just learning how to use the tools and finding out what basic
tagging is without being in
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Ralph Aytoun
wrote:
>
> New mappers have a lot to learn. They have enough of a problem just
> learning how to use the tools and finding out what basic tagging is without
> being inundated with error messages telling them they cannot save their
> work because of so
Hi
On 15.01.2016 23:01, Dave F. wrote:
> On 15/01/2016 16:25, Ralph Aytoun wrote:
>> I object to the continuous use of naming new mappers as a problem.
>
> Are you sure it's not the design of the editor that's being called out
> as the culprit?
I join this view, Iam not considering the people wh
Hi
On 15.01.2016 18:03, moltonel 3x Combo wrote:
> Changing the topic a little bit, I'd like to comment on alt_name vs
> name_1 va alt_name_1. To me name_1 and alt_name are exact synonyms, I
> don't see a semantic difference (as opposed to loc_name for example).
> Therefore, if you've only got two
sent from a phone
> Am 15.01.2016 um 22:48 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo :
>
> I don't recall encountering a multiple-name object that ought to
> be broken down in two objects. No stats, just your subjectivity
> against mine :p
this part of my mail was more generally referring to multivalues in f
On 15/01/2016 16:25, Ralph Aytoun wrote:
I am quite in favour of people coming forward to discuss the
possibility of improving the iD Editor if it is causing problems.
Could a "this key already exists,,," dialog be displayed?
I object to the continuous use of naming new mappers as a problem.
On 15/01/2016, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> Am 15.01.2016 um 18:03 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo :
>> To get back to my http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5257865
>> example, I've got 3 names to tag. One of them distinguishes itself by
>> also appearing on an out-of-copyright map, the other two ar
On Friday 15 January 2016, Ralph Aytoun wrote:
> When I started a waterway=wadi was an accepted tag
> but within a period of three months it was deprecated by a group that
> did not really understand it's cartographic usage.
I don't want to hijack this thread but the above is not quite correct -
sent from a phone
> Am 15.01.2016 um 17:25 schrieb Ralph Aytoun :
>
> Throughout the arid countries we now have these features
> (wadi/ouadi/arroyo/dry gulch/ etc.) without an appropriate tag.
time to make a proposal ;-)
cheers
Martin
___
Taggin
sent from a phone
> Am 15.01.2016 um 17:40 schrieb Marc Gemis :
>
> I'll agree with what you wrote, but I still wonder how you
> differentiate between all the supermarket types.
I don't yet, but it is indeed a field where we might want to map more detail in
the future.
>
> I'm thinking ab
sent from a phone
> Am 15.01.2016 um 18:03 schrieb moltonel 3x Combo :
>
> The problem is that all those name key variations carry semantic
> meaning. A loc_name isn't the same thing as an alt_name which isn't
> the same thing as an old_name.
yes, but a name, an alt_name and a nat_name are qu
On 15/01/2016, Kieron Thwaites wrote:
> I completely endorse the removal of any and all *_N tags.
If so, you've got a serious amount of work comming up just to figure
how to say the same thing using different tags. Semicolons and various
namespaced schemes sometimes do the trick, but outright ban
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> Obviously we wouldn't want people to tag the whole assortment of a
> supermarket like this, but due to the amount of work the risk is low.
I'll agree with what you wrote, but I still wonder how you
differentiate between all the superma
ated tools
Subject: [Tagging] Please don't think name_1 tags are errors.
Hi, I've just reverted http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36573638
where the mapper thought that name_1 tags were typos. That user is on
a key typo fixing spree, which is a good thing in itself, even if
mistakes h
Kieron Thwaites wrote:
> Whichever iD developer thought that adding random _N suffixes was
> a good idea deserves to be taken out back and shot.
Please withdraw that comment.
Advocating violence to people is not funny. You might want to say a
_feature_ should be taken outside and shot, but don't
2016-01-15 16:01 GMT+01:00 Kieron Thwaites :
> Whichever iD developer thought that adding random _N suffixes was a
> good idea deserves to be taken out back and shot.
>
maybe this kind of language is common in your cultural context, but I
believe it is completely inappropriate and extremely offe
2016-01-15 15:26 GMT+01:00 moltonel 3x Combo :
> But I wonder if some people know about the iD editor behavior below,
> and assume that a name_1 tag must have been created that way ? If so,
> consider this email as a reminder that the _N suffix is used on
> purpose by many people. As always, conta
Whichever iD developer thought that adding random _N suffixes was a
good idea deserves to be taken out back and shot. While handling
newbie mistakes (and teaching them the correct way of doing things) is
most certainly encouraged, doing it in such a way that pollutes
tagging is totally unacceptabl
Hi, I've just reverted http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36573638
where the mapper thought that name_1 tags were typos. That user is on
a key typo fixing spree, which is a good thing in itself, even if
mistakes happen.
But I wonder if some people know about the iD editor behavior below,
and a
21 matches
Mail list logo
