--- On Thu, 13/8/09, BlueMM <bluemm1975-...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> We have had the previous definition up on the Au tagging
> page for a long time, I
> know all my mapping has been based on that. I find it weird
> that someone brings
> up on the mailing list saying that the German's are tagging
> like X (contary to
> the wiki def), no one seems to comment much on the list,
> then the tagging
> guidelines are changed while we have thousands/millions? of
> ways mapped the
> previous way!!
I don't think I changed the meaning at all, and I don't think anything already
tagged has to change as a result of rewording.
How many rural roads did you tag as residential for example?
Also the Australian Tagging Guidelines shouldn't take precedent over the main
mapping features, it should be a translation of the mapping features into
Australian english.
> Also I agree with Liz over the "Non-existant streets"
> issue, how can we possibly
> put anything on the map that mentions copyright sources, by
> definition it has to
> be copyright. I just had a look at the section "What
I'm pretty sure Liz wasn't talking about that section.
> seems to say never copy copyrighted maps (good) and a list
> of things that would
> be done normally as part of "map what's on the ground". I
> see these as redundant
If it's so redundant why was so many people commenting on this list about what
to do and no one seemed to have a silver bullet in terms of an answer, while it
might seem redundant when you read it what if you hadn't?
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
