On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 6:22 PM, John Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4 May 2010 18:14, Roy Wallace <[email protected]> wrote: >> 1) allow for the specification of more than one type simultaneously, >> e.g. amenity=A;B, amenity=B;C, etc., or >> 2) change/specify in more detail the definitions of A, B and C so that >> they *are* mutually exclusive, or >> 3) be forced to tag things incorrectly >> >> Which option shall it be? I vote 2, which includes the option of just >> using amenity=D (where D=A OR B OR C) > > Do you have any concrete examples?
So, I've been asked for a concrete example, presumably referring to how to define fast_food/restaurant/cafe *mutually exclusively*. I looked at the current wiki definitions for all three tags, and these are the best, new *mutually exclusive* definitions I could come up with, in the form of a flowchart: http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/1179/amenity.gif If you have suggestions to improve the flowchart, that's great - the main point is that, I believe, it is possible to precisely define the definitions of cafe/amenity/restaurant. And, I would suggest a unified flowchart in this case makes life easier than comparing three separate, vague wiki pages, or by doing "mental experiments". _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
