Re: [talk-au] Morton Bay National Park should have it's ID numbers under ref=

I also agree. Putting other info into a name is not good practice. Separation allows map renderer and search functionality to decide what to do rather than being forced into something. I personally like to tag in a generic way as possible and therefore would use the "ref" tag as my choice. How

Re: [talk-au] Morton Bay National Park should have it's ID numbers under ref=

+ 1 name is for the name only. On 03/05/18 15:52, Andrew Harvey wrote: I agree. On Thu., 3 May 2018, 2:02 pm Joel H., wrote: Hello, I'm just noticing around Moreton Bay Marine Park. Many nature_reserves are currently formatted as follows: name= Honeymoon Bay (MNP05) Shouldn'

Re: [talk-au] Morton Bay National Park should have it's ID numbers under ref=

I agree. On Thu., 3 May 2018, 2:02 pm Joel H., wrote: > Hello, I'm just noticing around Moreton Bay Marine Park. Many > nature_reserves are currently formatted as follows: > > name= Honeymoon Bay (MNP05) > > Shouldn't this be: > > name= Honeymoon Bay > > ref= MNP05 > > ? > > > -Joel > > > >

[talk-au] Morton Bay National Park should have it's ID numbers under ref=

Hello, I'm just noticing around Moreton Bay Marine Park. Many nature_reserves are currently formatted as follows: name= Honeymoon Bay (MNP05) Shouldn't this be: name= Honeymoon Bay ref= MNP05 ? -Joel ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetma