[Tagging] Trailhead tagging

[Peter Elderson]

Someone asked what the requirements for a TOP in Nederland were. Not the
OSM definition, but the actual requirements for the operators. I've
answered that, without implying that these were OSM requirements or
definitions. I have made that explicitly clear in several messages. Please
do not suggest otherwise.

For OSM tagging, I am consistently working towards a basic tagging for all
designated/customary trailheads, including all TOPs en Natuurpoorten, for
existing and future mappers who find these worth mapping.

Op do 10 jan. 2019 om 10:19 schreef Marc Gemis <marc.gemis at gmail.com>:

> So we are back to what I wrote a couple of days ago, after I saw that
> Peter was struggling to come up with a trailhead definition that fits
> all the "TOP"s.
>
> We have on one hand trailheads (for which we seem to have a consensus)
> and on the other hand TOPs, which sometimes fit the definition of
> trailheads and sometimes not.
>
> m.
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 9:22 PM Andy Townsend <ajt1047 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 09/01/2019 18:35, Kevin Kenny wrote:
> > > Are we back to trying to warp the definition so that only
> > > Toeristich Overstappunt qualifies?
> > >
> > The reverse of that, actually - based on my limited knowledge of these
> > in Noord Holland (which to be fair Peter said weren't typical of the
> > Dutch ones) they didn't look much like trailheads to me.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Andy
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>


-- 
Vr gr Peter Elderson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190110/4f701408/attachment.html>