On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 11:25 AM, David Murn <da...@incanberra.com.au> wrote: > This doesnt sound wrong to me, if a service road can lead to a beach or > campsite, why not to a boatramp?
Of course. I would have something like: =====----|----------- where: = is highway=service - is waterway=slipway (or whatever the tag is) | is the water line. Not sure whether a junction matters. > I thought the tagging system was meant to be consistent, before being > flexible. If everyone tags boatramps in their own 'flexible' way, how > is any renderer supposed to know what to do, for every possible variant? Indeed. I didn't mean to start the whole philosophical debate about tagging again. > I believe it should be discussed in here, and the general consensus > should be applied when tagging, rather than everyone going off with > their own idea. I didn't mean for "everyone to go off with their own idea". Rather, if the current definition is too limiting, improve that, and document it in the central location, and use the new definition. Since you're documenting it in the central location, there is still only "one idea", unless someone disagrees with you, at which point you can work towards consensus. Just don't wait, and avoid tagging at all, simply because the definitions are inadequate. Steve _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
