Re: [Tagging] implied surface values?

2020-02-14 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Do., 13. Feb. 2020 um 12:02 Uhr schrieb ael : > > Well, yes, I thought that someone might say that. But such cases are > very much the minority (except perhaps for motorways), which is why > asphalt is still a reasonable default. I would expect an explicit > tag for anything which is not asphal

Re: [Tagging] Clarify explicit abstention when voting on a proposal

2020-02-14 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Do., 13. Feb. 2020 um 08:37 Uhr schrieb European Water Project < europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com>: > An opinion from an OSM neophyte > > Abstain should mean just that .. either no vote .. or a blank vote.. > which is a great difference according to how we count. We used to count it as "blank v

Re: [Tagging] Clarify explicit abstention when voting on a proposal

2020-02-14 Thread European Water Project
Hi Martin, According to wikipedia "Abstentions do not *count* in tallying the *vote* negatively or positively; when members *abstain*, they are in effect attending only to contribute to a quorum. " Do you think abstention should be equivalent to a no vote for the final tally ? Best regards, St

Re: [Tagging] Clarify explicit abstention when voting on a proposal

2020-02-14 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
Am Fr., 14. Feb. 2020 um 10:43 Uhr schrieb European Water Project < europeanwaterproj...@gmail.com>: > Hi Martin, > > According to wikipedia > > "Abstentions do not *count* in tallying the *vote* negatively or > positively; when members *abstain*, they are in effect attending only to > contribute