On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:11 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Am 17.04.2015 um 19:33 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt :
> > In all cases the argument that "some barely-detectable trace
> archaeological remnant remains" seems to be thin justification for a
> pre-held like of the f
> Am 17.04.2015 um 21:02 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt :
>
> "vending_machine" though still seems a strange tag, as the dog waste
> dispensers are very often free, and vending is described as involving money
+1, it is mistagging, already noticed in the past but people didn't care at the
time...
C
> Am 17.04.2015 um 19:33 schrieb Bryce Nesbitt :
>
> In all cases the argument that "some barely-detectable trace archaeological
> remnant remains" seems to be thin justification for a pre-held like of the
> feature.
The only problem with this comparison is that craters with hundreds of me
On that node I got tripped up because "vending"="excrement_bags" seems to
be used with and without "amenity"="vending_machine"
I followed tagging of nearby nodes in josm, but missed reading the wiki
convention. Sorry.
The overpass query to find other similar tags is:
["vending"="excrement_bags"]["
There's an insane disconnect between this discussion about keeping nuclear
explosion events, and the one about removing railways.
The argument seems to come down to what was left over and if it's
mappable. Well, the two are very similar:
* Nuclear explosions leave craters and radioactive isotopes
On 17/04/2015 02:05, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 04/17/2015 02:10 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
I propose to use context to determine the meaning, and retag according
to current conventions. For example "recycling:excrement" at a marina
dock will be assume as a marine sewage pumpout station. The sa
6 matches
Mail list logo
