Re: [OSM-talk] [proposal] Default values in a relation "definition"

[Roy Wallace]

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 12:52 AM, Pieren  wrote:
> I think you should rename your proposal as 'defaults' instead of
> 'definition' (type=defaults).

Agreed.

> And the prefix "def:" is not really necessary
> in your "def:key=value" tags.

Perhaps not, but it does help to make it clear that these are unusual
tags with an unusual purpose.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [proposal] Default values in a relation "definition"

[John Smith]

I wouldn't use the '&' symbol as it might be a value, not sure what to
use instead.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [proposal] Default values in a relation "definition"

[Pieren]

I think you should rename your proposal as 'defaults' instead of
'definition' (type=defaults). And the prefix "def:" is not really necessary
in your "def:key=value" tags.

Pieren
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [proposal] Default values in a relation "definition"

[Vincent Pottier]

Le 28/05/2010 16:00, Vincent Pottier wrote :
> ...
>
I beg your pardon.
The link : http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Definition
--
FrViPofm

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk