[OSM-talk] Parking symbols: YUCK!
Andy Robinson (blackadder)
blackadderajr at googlemail.com
Tue Feb 26 08:34:15 GMT 2008
Lester Caine wrote:
>Sent: 26 February 2008 8:12 AM
>To: OSM Talk
>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Parking symbols: YUCK!
>Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
>> On that list, my vote would be, in order of preference, 1,3,2
>> I've made a wiki page to collect votes, if people think that's a good
>Robert you are missing the whole point here.
>While the access=public applies to car parks - this would be preserved by
>general rule of copying the node tags to the area.
>ANY POI that is changed from node to area will potentially have the same
>problem, and we should be fixing the general rule not starting to build
>another set of pages for voting on every POI node/area conflict debate?
Both nodes and areas carrying the same data in OSM are perfectly valid just
as a unified approach is perfectly valid if the object is drawn as an area.
The point is that anything in OSM is allowable and there will be no rule
enforcement so spending hours debating possible rule ideas is all a waste of
Now that doesn't mean to say we shouldn't put ideas up on good practice,
that's perfectly valid. But don't expect everyone to adhere to it.
What we do know is that the renderers will get smatter with time and the
dataset will become richer. Whether we like it or not, many objects may have
a degree of duplication whatever guidance is given.
More information about the talk