[Tagging] Do we need more different tagging for telephone covers?

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Thu Jun 4 13:52:56 UTC 2020

Jun 4, 2020, 14:51 by pla16021 at gmail.com:

> On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 at 12:35, Lukas via Tagging <> tagging at openstreetmap.org> > wrote:
>> 1. covered=booth for closed phone-boxes, but some mappers do not really like that.
> The author of iD is one of the mappers who doesn't like it.  So much so that he
> removed that option from the preset for phone=*.  Unless you can persuade
> him to change his mind (you can't) then you can forget using covered=* because
> unless editors support it, few mappers will use it.
iD is just one of editors. If there are good arguments for that decision it should be considered.

> You're not going to change his mind
> on that, so forget about using covered=*.
If arguments are good one - then OK. But I see no reason to capitulate
and change tagging scheme just because currently deployed default editor
has a mistake in presets (like iD claiming that there are no paved or maintained highway=track)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200604/bf077156/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list