As pointed in my first mail out the issue is deprecating an existing scheme in the wiki without replacing it with something else that is either recognized as "how we do it now" or "approved" (the issue is not that there is yet another scheme bit rotting in proposal state).
My question was solely if there is some consensus that the kerb proposal is actually how it should be tagged now or if it is truly defunct and the original tagging scheme should continued to be used (as iD does). Simon Am 03.03.2016 um 11:58 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > > 2016-03-03 11:43 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch > <mailto:si...@poole.ch>>: > > The problem is "we" didn't. As already pointed out, there is only > a proposal that has been bit-rotting for multiple years (it > probably, when used on a crossing node, should have kerb:right and > kerb:left variants for the asymmetric cases, but that is the only > thing I see that might be improved). There's not even a JOSM > preset for it. > > > > > What is wrong with the proposal ("bitrotting")? The tag it documents > are used 24.000+ times. I agree with the addition of direction > dependent tags for asymetric situations, you should put this on the > discussion page, maybe in this paragraph: > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/kerb#Kerb_direction > > Cheers, > Martin > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
