Michał Borsuk <michal.borsuk <at> gmail.com> writes: > > I do value the time and efforts editors' authors invested, and I believe > > everyone does. > > Did you misunderstand me? I had said that since we have three editors, > not thirty, then we have to more or less do what the maintainers > (coders) of those editors want. We can't come up with just anything, > because it may not be implemented.
I haven't finished this for some reason, sorry. I mean, I do value their time and efforts, but editors are tools for editing OSM data. They haven't existed before OSM and their purpose is to edit OSM, so -- with all due respect -- they probably should implement what people need, not vice versa. Anyway, I understand you point with only 3 editors and I can't write the fourth one, so let's leave that topic alone. > But it's much easier. You will probably agree that the biggest mess is > having to go though several pages and examples before one has an idea > how to map. I agree. > > If you have another proposal, please come up. I personally do not have any > > sentimental feelings for the proposed scheme, I just believe it's better > > than > > the current situation. > > Well, not just anything is better than the current mess. I have an idea, > that is simply to properly describe what exists*), and I believe ant > started cleaning up the wikipages. > > *) I mean the version with two poles on each side. OK. While that proposal being discussed, I abstain from using proposed tag, limiting my neighborhood cleanup to two-poles-beside-the-way scheme. That's better than the current situation anyway. _______________________________________________ Talk-transit mailing list Talk-transit@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-transit
