[OSM-talk] Remove validation rule asking to add highway=footway to railway/public_transport=platform
phil at wyatt-family.com
Fri May 24 11:16:09 UTC 2019
PS – Is a meadow ‘used mainly or exclusively by pedestrians’? I think not, likewise is a carpark ‘used mainly or exclusively by pedestrians’ – again I think not. If there is a well worn path through the meadow then yes, or if there are designated footways through the carpark then yes they should also be added…in my opinion.
Cheers - Phil
From: Martin Koppenhoefer [mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 24 May 2019 8:02 PM
To: Phil Wyatt
Cc: Wiklund Johan; Talk
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Remove validation rule asking to add highway=footway to railway/public_transport=platform
Am Fr., 24. Mai 2019 um 11:44 Uhr schrieb Phil Wyatt <phil at wyatt-family.com>:
As a relatively new OSM editor, I tend to agree with the explicit tagging rather than implicit - it should help folks learn tags much faster
The problem is that a platform is not a footway, at least not universally. People can also walk over meadows, following this logics we should be suggesting to add highway=footway to all meadows? Or amenity=parking?
I agree, this should not become suggested tagging.
It is so sad the issue has been closed in the github tracker because of too many people complaining (politely) about a developer decision. Closing issues because of disagreement is toxic behaviour and it is understandable it makes people worrying.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk