On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 02:28:51PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > 10 Oct 2019, 10:44 by f...@zz.de: > > And i see fit in the original "Conventions" document [1] which terms > > it as "Divided highways should be drawn as separate ways." for divided > > highways. > > First - "should" is a relaxed term which is no MUST and second - > > it does not make any statement about > > > OSM Wiki is not following RFC 2119.
RFC2119 is just formalising and explaining English for non native speakers in this respect. > Generally accepted rules are usually > stated as "should" and similar. "Generally accepted" is correctly mapped to "should". But there are others which are really a must: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Node "Where ways intersect at the same altitude, the two ways must share a node (for example, a road junction)" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxweight "You must explicitly specify the unit if it is not in metric tonnes." So the English language is used appropriate in the Wiki. > And in case of lawyering - the same page > is (from what I see) not forbidding > other mappers to revert to single way > version. It does not even talk about non divided ways beeing mapped as seperated ways. So if lawyering correctly this whole discussion is moot because i dont think there is a place in wiki talking about ways without a divide to be mapped as 2 ways. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
