[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Obligatory vs. optional cycletracks)

[Richard Fairhurst]

Martin Vonwald (Imagic) wrote:
> Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> > No, no, no.
> In my opinion, there are a few "no"s missing here. So I'll add at least 
> one more: no. Well, make that two: No.

...there's no limit...

Richard





--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Feature-Proposal-RFC-Obligatory-vs-optional-cycletracks-tp5827960p5827995.html
Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com.