8 Nov 2019, 16:56 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
> Le 08.11.19 à 16:16, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit :
>
>> 7 Nov 2019, 14:39 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
>>
>>> Le 07.11.19 à 14:01, Andy Townsend a écrit :
>>>
you won't see a unique sign that identifies "you can't cycle here"
>>> an goo
Le 08.11.19 à 16:16, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit :
> 7 Nov 2019, 14:39 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
>> Le 07.11.19 à 14:01, Andy Townsend a écrit :
>>> you won't see a unique sign that identifies "you can't cycle here"
>> an good pratice rule is "don't map the legislation", isn't it
7 Nov 2019, 14:39 by marc_marc_...@hotmail.com:
> Le 07.11.19 à 14:01, Andy Townsend a écrit :
>
>> you won't see a unique sign that identifies "you can't cycle here"
>>
>
> an good pratice rule is "don't map the legislation", isn't it ??
> no sign ? thus no tag on the way
>
Not always. Typical
sent from a phone
> On 7. Nov 2019, at 14:57, Andy Townsend wrote:
>
>> an good practice rule is "don't map the legislation", isn't it ??
>
> If you can infer defaults from legislation, sure, but as has previously been
> said you explicitly can't do that here.
+1
Cheers Martin
__
On 07/11/2019 13:39, marc marc wrote:
Le 07.11.19 à 14:01, Andy Townsend a écrit :
you won't see a unique sign that identifies "you can't cycle here"
an good practice rule is "don't map the legislation", isn't it ??
If you can infer defaults from legislation, sure, but as has previously
been
Le 07.11.19 à 14:01, Andy Townsend a écrit :
> you won't see a unique sign that identifies "you can't cycle here"
an good pratice rule is "don't map the legislation", isn't it ??
no sign ? thus no tag on the way
at most a default value in the wiki or on the boundary.
__
