<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>17 gru 2022, 01:19 od graemefitz1@gmail.com:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div></div><div><br></div><div class=""><div class="" dir="ltr">On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 at 17:55, Marc_marc <<a href="mailto:marc_marc@mailo.com" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">marc_marc@mailo.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class=""><div>Le 16.12.22 à 08:30, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging a écrit :<br></div><div><br></div><div> > In this case amenity=lifeboat is - I expect - used to map lifeboat <br></div><div> > stationing place, not lifeboat itself<br></div><div> <br></div><div> of course, like marina doesn't map boats but the mooring area<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes, that is how they are being used, but the tag is being completed with the name & details of the lifeboat itself, which, to me at least, infers that this boat is always at this spot, & it isn't.<br></div><div><br></div><div>The other issue with the currently mapped info is that most of it appears to have come from an unauthorised source.<br></div></div></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">Can you link problematic changeset? (if there is import from invalid source then <br></div><div dir="auto">contacting DWG is a good idea. Also, I hope that I am not writing this<br></div><div dir="auto">to DWG member again)<br></div> </body>
</html>