On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Aun Johnsen (via Webmail)<[email protected]> wrote: >> I agree. So, how about maxheight:physical, maxheight:legal, and leave >> room for others if there is a demonstrable need in future? ... > If this is your suggestion to solve this, than I suggest you do something > about it and get that information on the maxheight documentation. I am not > sure how you intend this to be done. When you have a process going, point > me there, the current documentation on maxheight does not support the needs > for me, so my solution was to make another tag. I havn't seen you do more > about it than to attack my attempt to solve this.
Sorry if I've offended you, Aun - I didn't mean to attack your attempt, and I admire your pro-activity in creating the clearance proposal. I agree with you that the current documentation on maxheight is insufficient. I'm just using this list as I thought it was meant to be used - to get some discussion going and see if we can reach some sort of a consensus before going to the next step of wiki documentation. So, I repeat my question: what do you and others think? Do you think maxheight:physical and maxheight:legal is better or worse than maxheight and clearance? _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
