<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 26/02/2015 8:33 PM, Kotya Karapetyan
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAK2dJ-xwQG07CuPyzFqa-3an-LWGgEBeiCfdRDZzAfMCW_BWyA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi Warin,
Why rush? I don't think it's a question of how long the discussion
took. The proposal still has open issues, some of which are even
mentioned in the proposal page itself. So what are we voting for?</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<big>I missed this bit ....<br>
<br>
Just to be clear .. the voting is for the key: temperature=<br>
<br>
I take the thing 'we' vote on being the title and tagging
descriptions at the top of the page .. the rest is explanation,
argument and possible future things. <br>
<br>
<br>
Not to vote the values that might be assigned to it. Those may
need further individual discussion and work. There looks to be
broad support for most of the given values. But I think it is too
complex to discuss them all together. However 'we' are encouraged
to be verbose in the explanation of the thing proposed. <br>
<br>
<i>ASSUME - making an ASS out of U and ME. </i><br>
<br>
E.G <br>
If the proposal were for "amenity=sanitation_dump_point"<br>
<br>
then you would be voting on the value of the key amenity being
"sanitation_dump_point" <br>
<br>
If the proposal were for "amenity=" you would be voting for the
key " amenity" ... <br>
<br>
At least that is the way I see it. <br>
<br>
To say that a proposal for a key must have all its values in place
at the start means any addition would mean a new vote of the
entire key with all the previous values and the new value.. rather
pointless. It also extends the process by allowing discussions on
values that may see little if any use while the key and readily
agreed values wait. <br>
</big><br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>