On 11.12.2013 15:52, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > 2013/12/11 fly <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > I am still in favour of this proposal. > > Yes, we need to better distinguish between area:highway and landuse. > > > > I don't see the problem. The only reason that the strange and > "un-traditional" tag "area:highway" was introduced was to avoid > confusion with the legal road (landuse). We are already tagging > similarly for railways (landuse=railway). Where are the open questions?
I do not have any questions but the proposal does not even mention area:highway=* and is talking about landuse=grass which should be avoided, anyway. All along this is one more example of the lately used practice to start voting after a few weeks with not well designed proposals (useful tags but missing links, missing pictures, missing differentions etc.). At least it seems to lead to more discussion about the issues. cu fly _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
