[Tagging] Tagging the presence or absence of signs for surveillance cameras

[John Sturdy]

Whatever the concensus in another discussion was, I think that double
negatives will risk confusion, and that *:signed=yes and *:signed=no seems
to be a reasonable proposal.

I have noticed that some but not all of the surveillance cameras (city
council, I believe) in Cambridge (UK) have signs.

__John

On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 10:13 AM marc marc <marc_marc_irc at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Le 19.02.20 à 04:29, Victor/tuxayo a écrit :
> > Coincidentally there was a recent discussion[2] about these signs in the
> > french mailing list (talk-fr) which lead to adding the following section
> > in the page
> > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made=surveillance
>
> I warn that this addition does not reflect the discussion that took
> place on talk-fr, but is "self-declared as consensus"
> more than half of the opinions are that a regulatory sign of this kind
> is not tourist information (imho I think it is closer to a sign that
> announces a pedestrian crossing or a maxspeed zone)
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200219/94ee6190/attachment.htm>