Dave Stubbs wrote: > Maybe, but you're then asking, "reviewed what/how?". And you're back > to specifying that you've reviewed that the road has no name, only > probably in a more complicated way.
Furthermore, I would expect the default (meaning the value to be assumed if the key doesn't exist) to be "yes". I doubt anyone who would put in a named road without bothering to put in the name would bother to enter a "reviewed=no" tag anyway. That said, I still doubt the utility of a "no name" meta-value. No conscientious mapper should be putting in roads with no name if they have a name, and no one should be going out of their way to check if a road that has no name in the db actually has no name. What next, going out of your way to double-check that the name is (still) correct? (Yes, I've had a road where the name was changed. I caught it because I happened to drive past that way, not because I'm going around repeatedly checking the same routes "just in case". Treat an unnamed road as the simple notification that it is, not as a problem to be corrected. -Alex Mauer "hawke"
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
