On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 19:08:45 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2010/11/1 Andrew Errington <[email protected]>: > > On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 18:22:19 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: > >> 2010/11/1 SomeoneElse <[email protected]>: > >> > On 31/10/2010 13:46, Gorm E. Johnsen wrote: > >> >> I propose to replace highway=ford with ford=yes (or perhaps > >> >> barrier=ford?) on nodes as well, simply to de-clutter the highway tag > >> >> and to be more consistent. > >> > >> IMHO for the cases I tagged highway=ford on nodes it fits well. > >> "simply to declutter" is not a sufficient argument to change 5000 tags > >> that are in use for a long time. > > > > ford=yes is the right answer, like bridge=yes and tunnel=yes. A ford is > > a linear feature, usually extending across the width of a river, much > > like a bridge does, which could be several metres long. > > I tagged a path crossing a stream with highway=ford. Even if this is > on closeup a linear feature, beeing the stream less then 1 meter wide > and the path as well, anything else then a node seems exaggerated to > me. If the ford is to cross a real river I agree that a way would be > better.
So ford=yes can apply to a way or a node. Easy. > > Replacing 5000 instances of > > the 'old' tag is a drop in the ocean. > > no, it is completely replacing an entire feature forcing your own idea > of how a feature should be represented. Automated Edits of this kind > are not welcome. See the wiki on automated edits. Well it would be if I was going to do it, which I never even mentioned. Best wishes, Andrew _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
