On 04/04/2015, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 4/04/2015 8:58 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote: > > It is a 'No' vote. Not an abstain. > > ............................. > For an English definition see > http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/154075?redirectedFrom=published#eid
That's behind a paywall. Would you copy oed's definition here ? A small enough quote should be fair use. I went ahead and looked at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publishing instead, which I feel would be more universal than a uk-centric definition anyway. > Replacement of the word 'Approved" with Published' will cause a > similar level of confusion. No gain, indeed a loss as time will be > wasted changing the word 'approved'. I'm sure "published" will bring its fair share of confusion. And if it didn't, this mailinglist would have a very hard time agreeing on it : we need to leave some marginof interpretation or else everybody will veto some tiny detail. But whatever the level of confusion of both terms may be, I still think that "approved" is a step in the right direction. It's closer to what *I* think proposals are good for. Even if the error bar was bigger, the value is more correct and the term is better. One can try to write a page defining what "published" means in the context of wiki proposals. But given the current level of controversy, I wish the authors good luck :p _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
