On 27/01/2016, Marc Gemis <marc.ge...@gmail.com> wrote: > The main problem is that the lane tagging is established tagging with > several 10.000's of mapped ways. Do you really want to change that ? > It will take years before they are all converted to whatever new > syntax we come up with. Not to mention data consumers (e.g. OsmAnd) > that have to be adapted to support both syntaxes.
While it may not make sense to convert existing lane tags to whatever gets decided here, the lane attribute is a good usecase to test an MV scheme against. If an MV scheme can't handle a known important usecase, we'll have a hard time recomending it as *the* MV scheme. FWIW, I think the suffix scheme maps to the :lanes namespace in a very logical and straightforward way. It's just... Much more verbose than the currently established scheme. Even if editors started supporting this kind of structured data in a nice way, it'd be a hard sell compared to typing a handfull of ';' and '|'. This is certainly an important reason why semicolon-MV remains popular despite its technical issues compared to suffix_MV. Mappers do not (all) think like programers. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
