Richard Welty <[email protected]> wrote: > i think it has the potential to be confusing, in part because > tracktype > already exists > for highway=track, and tracktype is entirely about actual physical > characteristics. > > i suspect it is a mistake to try to aggregate logical information > about > a path's > significance (or the significance of its endpoints) with information > about its > physical characteristics. > > richard > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
I agree. Speaking as someone who deals with databases every day at work, given separate pieces of information, you can always combine them at need. If all you have is the composite data, it isn't always possible to derive the details. In this instance, someone else might need just the volume-of-use information, or just the degree-of-overgrowth information. -- John F. Eldredge -- [email protected] "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
