On 27/01/2016, Colin Smale <colin.sm...@xs4all.nl> wrote: > One way, using a "subscript syntax" with a "data structure" construct > using a "." as a separator": > lane[1].destination=Paris > lane[2].destination[1]=Rome > lane[2].destination[2]=Milan > lane[3].destination[1]=Berlin > lane[3].destination[2]=Munich > > Alternatively, using a "suffix syntax", something like you suggest > lane_1:destination=Paris > lane_2:destination_1=Rome > lane_2:destination_2=Milan > etc. > > Thirdly, using the "seamark" construction: > lane:1:destination:1=Paris > lane:2:destination:1=Rome > lane:2:destination:2=Milan > etc.
Concerning foo_1 vs foo[1] vs foo:1, I this the last one can be safely thrown to the idea bin (despite being used by seamarks) because ':' clashes with namespacing, which is firmly established. foo[1] looks better than foo_1 to my programer eyes, but is has no technical advantage (?) and I suspect that most people will find foo_1 more pleasing, it's also one less character to type, less annoying to parse with a regexp, and much more established in taginfo. Concerning using '.' as a separator instead of ':', I don; t see what it brings us, beside familiarity to users of some programing languages (but change language and sudenly ':' becomes more familiar). _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
