righto; votes cleared. proposal modified. new vote set in a week's time. I'm not keen on the enforcement direction being forwards and backwards. I can think of examples: * Common mobile station on a bridge - on a way which has no relation to the direction of enforcement * On a crossroads/traffic signals (red light camera) where two ways cross, in which case forwards and backwards are meaningless (two or more ways share the node) * Off a carriageway on a node covering one or more ways (where direction is important but not given by a way) ...so I'm going to leave that as-is
Plus direction I've got in mind as a data_type (see maxspeed thread on the mailing list, and also my comments on "waypoints with directions") so it would be good to be more generic. Tristan 2008/10/17 David Groom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Tristan Scott > > To: Frederik Ramm > > Cc: talk@openstreetmap.org > > Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 4:32 PM > > Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Voting: traffic_enforcement > > > > > > Hmm. noting the comments on votes about tag highway it seems that it > would > > be a better scheme to use "traffic_enforcement=speed" instead of both > > "highway=traffic_enforcement" AND "enforcement_type=speed" > > > > Now - this isn't my proposal, I'm just rather keen and willing to try to > > help. > > What's the correct procedure now to change this sort of thing? > > > > Do we need to stop this proposal, construct a new one and RFC it before > > voting again (in a month's time!) > > Or could we, for example, clear the votes, modify the proposal and > request > > votes again? > > Or, given this isn't my proposal, should I keep my nose out? :) > > > > It strikes me that good suggestions like this can't be handled by the > vote > > system, and don't seem to get picked up at the RFC stage... so you end up > > knowing what the "best" solution is, yet approving something that isn't > > it. > > > > Tristan > > > > I'm all for clearing the votes, rewriting the proposal, and then voting on > the new proposal in say a week. > > All except one of the votes was made today, presumably in response to your > earlier posting, so it might be safe to assume that those who have already > approved the tagging read this mailing list and will see the proposal is > being changed. > > David > > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- Tristan Scott BSc(Hons) Yare Valley Technical Services www.yvts.co.uk 07837 205829
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
