& after being reminded about it, I should have added my usual disclaimer that the G photos are only for illustration purposes, they were not used in any way for mapping!
Thanks Graeme On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 at 09:32, Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com> wrote: > This discussion started in response to something that I mapped. > > I was clearing a note / Inspector issue nearby & wondered why this street > appeared differently on the map: > > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/216566993 > > Had a look & it was tagged as a service-alley which just didn't seem > right, but neither did =residential, so I changed it to =tertiary > (=unclassified may have been better?). > > Question was raised as to whether it should be, so I've now changed it to > =living_street pending outcome of these discussions. > > Here it is FYI: > > https://goo.gl/maps/g3jpqjDQLgCktmfc7 > > https://goo.gl/maps/wNQyQo7RZRyg94pg8 > > So what do we think it should be? > > Thanks > > Graeme > > > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
