<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body>
<div>Yes, I would be happy for you to do this.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>--</div>
<div>Andrew<br>
</div>
<br>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Dave F via Talk-GB <talk-gb@openstreetmap.org><br>
<b>Sent:</b> 11 July 2022 03:14<br>
<b>To:</b> Dave F via Talk-GB <talk-gb@openstreetmap.org><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Talk-GB] boundary & admin_level tags on ways.</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt;">
<div class="PlainText"><br>
<br>
On 10/07/2022 21:22, Colin Smale wrote:<br>
> For what it's worth I would like to leave these tags (at least boundary=*) on the ways.<br>
><br>
> I know it's a rather selfish reason, but when working in Potlatch (as I and many others still do) it shows the boundary way in a distinctive style, so it stands out a bit and is easier to follow.<br>
<br>
This is one of the (minor) reasons why I would like them removed. I find <br>
the Potlatch rendering obscures the /real/ purpose of the way.<br>
<br>
> In any case, I would argue that these tags could be considered redundant or superfluous, but not erroneous (assuming they are not erroneous of course). In other words, their presence is not worth the effort to go round deleting them without any other reason
to update that way.<br>
<br>
It can be performed in one changeset.<br>
I'm still struggling to understand why some contributors have an <br>
aversion to amending tags. Redundancy is a prime reason for editing. <br>
There's nothing wrong with a spring clean of superfluousness.<br>
<br>
And before anybody replies with the illogical 'non updated data <br>
encourages people to update' nonsense again - Sorry It just don't buy it.<br>
<br>
<br>
> A bit like the widespread use of oneway=no or access=yes - possibly pointless, but not actually WRONG.<br>
><br>
> I don't see how could they lead to confusion and erroneous edits though.<br>
<br>
If the boundaries change & only the way is amended it leads to errors.<br>
Contributors see the tag on the way could assume there wouldn't be an <br>
extras on any of the relations.<br>
Having two of something, when only one is required is only going to lead <br>
to cock-ups.<br>
<br>
DaveF<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.<br>
<a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus">https://www.avast.com/antivirus</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Talk-GB mailing list<br>
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org<br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a><br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</body>
</html>