<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">6 Jul 2019, 14:07 by osm@westnordost.de:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><blockquote>I am trying to make lit=yes/no definition more precise<br></blockquote><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">I think that your suggestions would make the definition actually less precise because they add a fair level of subjectiveness: "necessary to bring your own light"<br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left"><br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">The least subjective definition is to map the physical presence of street lanterns on the way, not the light they emit. (This definition (though) would mean that a footway close to a lit street would be mapped as unlit as long as it does not have own lanterns.)<br></div></blockquote><div style="16px" text-align="left">This may be less subjective but would be quite pointless - there are many, many cases (at least in my city) <br></div><div style="16px" text-align="left">where many footways are well lit without dedicated lanterns.<br></div> </body>
</html>