<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 08/02/19 01:02, Sergio Manzi wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:1d988adf-def7-5cf5-9160-bece64303e59@smz.it">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
      <p>I don't really know where I was at that times, mostly because I
        don't know when that times where, honestly. Should I feel
        ashamed?</p>
      <p>I wasn't criticizing the rationale for having a better wording
        for the status of that kind of "<i>debatable</i>" tags, but only
        the wording you proposed.</p>
      <br>
    </blockquote>
    Hopefully you were off enjoying yourself, possibly with some real
    mapping on th e side. <br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:1d988adf-def7-5cf5-9160-bece64303e59@smz.it">
      <p><br>
      </p>
      <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2019-02-07 14:48, Paul Allen
        wrote:<br>
      </div>
      <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPy1dOJJVvbjL_PLTgtoAqZAVy1_GjfHmEvkSkf_XP2iEnVnyQ@mail.gmail.com">
        <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
          charset=utf-8">
        <div dir="ltr"><br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <div>Were you here when we discussed landuse=clearing that
              somebody found used (presumably</div>
            <div>by a HOT mapper)?  Used only a handful of times.  </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </blockquote>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    That was I.<br>
    Presently in the data base ~ 1,400 times. <br>
    <br>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:1d988adf-def7-5cf5-9160-bece64303e59@smz.it">
      <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPy1dOJJVvbjL_PLTgtoAqZAVy1_GjfHmEvkSkf_XP2iEnVnyQ@mail.gmail.com">
        <div dir="ltr">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <div>It had not been proposed and accepted, or</div>
            <div>proposed and rejected.  It was not widely used.  It was
              something that somebody had made up</div>
            <div>on the spot from lack of knowledge about the correct
              way to deal with it.  The wiki should</div>
            <div>probably document and deprecate it, for the benefit of
              anyone who finds it on taginfo and</div>
            <div>would otherwise assume it to be acceptable.<br>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </blockquote>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    Humm document that it is not known what it is, that the original
    mappers fail to respond? <br>
  </body>
</html>