Hi! Thomas Wood wrote:
> I must congratulate the group for producing what seems to be a good > clear document covering afaics most issues that have been raised > here in the past. Thank you very much, I (and most probably the rest of the group, too) appreciate that! > One concern I have (and one that's probably been expressed many > times on talk@ etc) is the use of disused=*, rather than adjusting > the 'primary' tag on the feature. (eg, railway=disused > disused=light_rail etc) Yes, this may be the better way to handle disused railways; but what about disused railways which "suddenly" become reactivated again? With railway=disused and disused=light_rail, the mapper would have to delete the latter tag or assign the value "no" to it and to assign another value to the former tag. Whereas with railway=* and disused=yes, the mapper just would have to to delete the latter tag or assign the value "no" to it. > Anyway, well done, when I get my exams for this summer over with, > I'll be pleased to try getting the NaPTAN data (more) in-line with > whatever revision of this spec we have by then. Great!!! Kind regards -- Sebastian Schwarz kahlfrost.de _______________________________________________ Talk-transit mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
