[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Fire Hydrant Extensions)

[Yves]

That's often the case with the voting process. 
However there is a few constructive comments that could be addressed to refine this proposal. Think about what is essential, and what is not (like namespaces or not). 

In such a specialized tagging scheme, I always thought it would be nice if voters could be asked to tell if they ever mapped an hydrant. Not saying that semantic ideas about OSM tags are not of use, but it could have the effect to think a bit more before saying yes or no without comments, and also to better understand the vote meaning. 

Yves 


Le 5 octobre 2017 12:16:57 GMT+02:00, Viking <viking81 at tin.it> a écrit :
>I really don't understand why so many people oppose this proposal [1]
>without ever having participated in the discussions that lasted for
>months.
>We did many efforts to reach this compromise that seems a good solution
>for firefighters' needs, and now people are opposing to it whithout 
>understanding the reasons why we chose this scheme.
>I am very saddened.
>
>Alberto
>
>[1]
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Fire_Hydrant_Extensions
>
>
>---
>Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast
>antivirus.
>https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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/20171005/df0f2d25/attachment.html>