Sorry, I apparently was not clear enough there. I've corrected it on the wiki. I meant to decide what values to use when boolean values are intended. The examples given were not intended as examples when only boolean values are allowed. Instead of bridge=jomenvisst we should use bridge=yes, and instead of electrified=naltaseotroligt we should use electrified=yes. If we want to specify the type you are of course welcome to do that, e.g. bridge=viaduct or electrified=contact_line. But true/1/ja/da/japp/jej/Yes/YES/sant/recht/riktigt/korrekt/sschjo/... should be replaced by yes.
And as I wrote twice on the wiki already from the start, and I quote: "Care has to be taken so that keys expecting numerical values doesn't receive boolean. We don't want e.g. layer=yes". In general I believe that should mean that numerical values should not be touched by automatic changes unless for keys known to not have a numerical value (e.g. bridge). Konrad >>> >>> How precisely is that going to end the debate? >>> >>> a) Voting isn't the way to do this. It either needs consensus or a >>> dictator. >> >> It will probably demonstrate that there already *is* a consensus to use >> "yes" for this. > > true. I agree that we could (IMHO should) agree on one way to tag > "true" and that is already (by majority in tags/presets) "yes" (and > accordingly 0/false should be "no"). But I doubt there is any key that > is just true/false. The examples on the voting page all have different > values as well, some (electrified) even in majority. Furthermore it > won't be possible to change automatically all "1" to yes, as sometimes > this might be the amount "one". There is a difference between > disabled_spaces=yes and disabled_spaces=1 for instance. > > cheers, > Martin > _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
