Jukka Rahkonen writes: > You seem to believe that SteveC would make such a decision that > makes you happy. How about if he says that if you want people to > continue working with OSM "in creative, productive, or unexpected > ways" then true/false, yes/no, and 0/1 issue must be tolerated.
That's okay, too. What I want, what I REALLY want, is for SteveC to be able to exercise leadership without being told that he's evil for doing so. There's a set of people who feel that mappers shouldn't be given guidance, because if they accidentally don't follow it, they'll feel bad and might stop mapping. But there's also a set of mappers who are editing because they want to create the best map possible. We change true and 1 to yes when we edit something. And we want to know what is the "proper" way to mark a road as having no name. Going to the wiki and finding nine different schemes (none of which are supported by the Noname renderer) is not helpful. I'm 100% in favor of freedom. I'm 100% in favor of free-form tagging. But I'm also 100% in favor of guidance from experienced editors. Oh, to hell with it. I'll just mark the damned road noname=yes, and if you find a road with no name and YOU mark it noname=yes, then good for you. And if not, then I don't have to cooperate with you either. -- --my blog is at http://blog.russnelson.com Crynwr supports open source software 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-323-1241 Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | Sheepdog _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
