[Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

[Colin Smale]

Richard, you are entirely forgiven. Thanks for your contributions. I had
to look up "Golgafrincham B Ark" but unfortunately I can see your
point...  

Have a good weekend 

Colin 

On 2015-10-30 14:55, Richard Fairhurst wrote: 

> Colin Smale wrote: 
> 
>> Is the situation now clear? Is it now (unambiguously) clear to 
>> (all) mappers how to tag paths?
> 
> No.
> 
>> So you are saying that any discussions on the mailing lists are 
>> just distractions as the real decisions are taken elsewhere. 
>> Where would that be then?
> 
> They're not expressly "taken elsewhere". Generally, good practice in OSM -
> whether in tagging, development, or whatever - _evolves_ from clued-up
> people doing things well, documenting what they do, and others adopting
> these practices. Endless tagging debates on this list and the wiki don't
> help this process, and often hinder it by replacing this natural selection
> process with arbitrary mechanisms such as voting.
> 
> In other words, tagging@ and the wiki are the Golgafrincham B Ark of OSM.
> 
> You'll forgive me for not answering the remainder of the six questions but
> it's Friday and I too am now losing the will to live. :|
> 
> Richard
> 
> --
> View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/More-human-readable-values-for-traffic-signs-tp5857897p5858331.html
> Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20151030/fb02a21f/attachment.html>