On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:11:21AM +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > If I put my mind to it, I could easily muster enough OSMers I know > personally to turn over the highway=gate vote next month, just for the > fun of it. That should demonstrate to you how little weight the process > carries. > > So I'd rather not be too fast with implementing the results of a vote.
There. We agree! Neither I think we need to be very fast with it. But that doesn't mean we should start thinking about it, and thinking about how to handle such things. This could also include improving the voting process. > > >It's just a bit silly to encourage keeping of > >highway=gate when we've just voted on barrier=gate. > > Who's "we"? *I* have not voted. There are more than 2.000 different > people who have used highway=gate. How many people have voted to replace > it with something else, and do you really think this is enough? > Well. This is actually a good example of a quite obvious change. Imho. A gate is not a highway, it's a....barrier! But I realize there are more complex and disputed changes. And btw - I didn't vote either, but I would have, had the voting process been more available :) (I know of it, I just don't filter it out from rest and participate...) -- - Vegard Engen, member of the first RFC1149 implementation team. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
