2012/6/13 Tobias Knerr <o...@tobias-knerr.de>: > Can you give a concrete example where it is actually more powerful?
For example the self-defined conditions. Not elegant in my opinion, improvable, but quite nice! > Something that can be expressed with "restrictions 1.5", but not with > the "extended conditions" syntax? > > (Yes, it lists "more of the same" - more vehicle types, more groups of > users, more weather conditions and so on. But that's not what I mean. > These things don't have anything to do with the syntax.) > >> However your example "access:lgv?wet.speed" is a good one against the >> 1.5 proposal. But why not combine those proposals? This would result >> in "maxspeed:hgv?wet". I read this as "the MAXSPEED for HGV IF (the >> question mark) weather is WET is ...". Sound reasonable to me. > > More reasonable than "access:lgv?wet.speed", yes. But how is it easier > than "maxspeed:hgv:wet"? Simply because it uses different separators for different purposes. The : is used often for subkeys. It is not a good choice here. The 1.5 uses the ? in front of the condition. So it is obvious where the condition starts. IMO a good approach. Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
