[OSM-talk] Abnormal votings on military objects in RU wiki part; PocketGIS madness

[Gregory]

On 12 April 2010 13:21, Johann H. Addicks <addicks at gmx.net> wrote:

> > military, but it is used/guarded by them. It would surprise me if there
> are
> > no signs to tell you it is something to do by the military.
>
> There are nice echelon sites in germany which just have high fences and
> signs
> warning about high voltage.
> But plate stating something about military or use by gouvernmental
> agencies.
> not even warnings about armed guards.
> Even on the doorbell does not give a slightest hint...
>
> http://www.addicks.net/albums/Irgendwo/DSCF2103.jpg
>
>
This is a good example to my cute bunny farm story (although your example is
not so fluffy and cute). So I think we cannot mark it as landuse=military
without some other source (referenced using source=*). Perhaps then it is
landuse=industrial with access=private. Are there any tags for dangerous
areas? I can only think of the jokes along the lines of landowner=angry
shotgun=yes for when you get shouted at trying to follow a public footpath
(in the UK they can cross fields but sometimes end up wrongly sign posted or
the farmer doesn't know/acknowledge/accept them).

Regarding the demand to translate the whole thread in 24 hours, I point them
to http://translate.google.com/ <http://translate.google.com/#> as I have
had to use when reading a few forum posts. But as we see, the automatic
translation given is not very helpful and I think it's really not helping
issues here. If anyone had the money (and I don't see why they should have
to spend it) to pay a professional translator, then I think 24 hours would
be a very difficult time to organise it (and while the thread continues to
grow!).

-- 
Gregory
osm at livingwithdragons.com
http://www.livingwithdragons.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100412/5edc085b/attachment.html>