On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 6:58 PM, Colin Smale <[email protected]> wrote: > Excluding the argument that "that's the way it is now, why change", are > there any arguments in favour of a value-based approach? If we were looking > at this problem as if we were designing OSM on a clean whiteboard, what > reasons are there to say that that the "multivalued keys" problem is best > addressed in the Value domain?
For destination:lanes you could have Paris|Rome;Milan|Berlin;Munich for 3 lanes with different destinations. The middle lane has destinations Rome and Milan. I have no idea how you can solve this with a key based approach: destination_1:lane_2 = Rome ?? Also the semi-colon is used a lot as separator in the opening_hours tag. Even if we are not considering solutions, please add the functional specification for destination:lanes and all xxx:lanes (e.g. turn:lanes) to the list of things to consider. I thought of some extra examples of things needing multiple values sport=multi needs a solution traffic_calming in case of e.g. a table + choker combination street names for streets that form the border between 2 villages and have different names on both sides surface, e.g. concrete lanes with cobblestones in the middle, or a track that is half dirt half asphalt for cyclists. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
