> I'd ask the following be excluded ? > cm (used in the clothing and foot ware trades ..not an OSM thing ) > cubits
I don’t think that there is a need to “exclude” some values (and “allow” anything else). Insteat, I think there is a need to “allow” some values (and exclude anything else). 2015-04-03 9:16 GMT, Lukas Sommer <[email protected]>: >>> So please move it to the “Proposal/” namespace. >> That's not possible for a working template, > >> Note the template is not USED, > > And it should also not be used, because it’s just your personal > proposal for a discussion. So there is no need to have a working > template. So please move it to the “Proposal/” namespace. > > 2015-04-03 8:51 GMT, Bryce Nesbitt <[email protected]>: >> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 1:25 AM, Martin Vonwald <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 for the deletion (or at least move it to the proposal namespace). A >>> simply direct link to Map_Features/Units should be enough. >>> >> >> The majority of existing tags have a summary of the Map_Features/Units >> embedded on their own pages. >> That's a good thing for tl;dr readers. >> > > > -- > Lukas Sommer > -- Lukas Sommer _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
