Arflha's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 176667051 | I find it much more intuitive to have a source:geometry and source:geometry:url than a source:geometry and source_ref:geometry. |
|
| 176667051 | Okay, but this breaks the hierarchy of source:geometry and moreover source:geometry:ref is already used for something other than urls, source:url being already used and approved, I would therefore prefer a derivative source:geometry:url in this case. |
|
| 176667051 | Hi,
|
|
| 105248730 | ||
| 105248730 | Place Pierre Semard, il n'y a pas lieu de créer deux voies de circulation mappées séparément quand il n'y a pas de séparation physique entre elles. |
|
| 176332437 | Salut,
|
|
| 175673031 | I'm not very comfortable with date namespaces. The chosen format, TAG:DATE-DATE, is both imprecise (no month, no day) and unusable for querying and data processing. Furthermore, we already have start_date:namespace for that. However, on reflection, the current_situation tag isn't descriptive enough; "latest development" would be clearer. This doesn't preclude using the tags you mentioned, though. |
|
| 175673031 | Hi,
|
|
| 175673031 | Hi,
|
|
| 173483930 | Hi, All mm ways should be in m as of now. I've shifted most of them from min/max to start/end when the road is shifting from one width to another such as this one way/1426169241 However there are ways which do not switch from one width to another but rather have a varying widht, and in those cases min/max is appropriate. Should I ask for a wiki page to be created ? |
|
| 173529294 | Shift from wikimaginot url to ref:wikimaginot is done ;-) |
|
| 173529294 | Thanks, I'll add it ! |
|
| 173529294 | ref:wikimaginot seems the most appropriate, isn't it ? How can I ask for the ref:wikimaginot to provide a link with the tag id in a similar way as other ref:tags do ? |
|
| 173536648 | Par contre, si les entrées sont dissociées (l'une 72, l'autre 74...), tu peux mettre un point avec entrance=main ou yes et l'adresse sur ce point.
|
|
| 173536648 | Salut,
|
|
| 162503396 | Salut,
|
|
| 135447471 | Toujours rue de l'Énergie, là où la zone ballastée double en largeur c'est là où se situait l'évitement. |
|
| 135447471 | C'est exact, entre Destrée et la route de Châtelet il reste le site propre, rue de l'Énergie il reste tout l'accotement ballasté et sur les sections en site propre l'emprise est encore visible. |
|
| 135447471 | La page wiki ne semble pas indiquer qu'il y a eu une prise de décision dans ce sens railway=abandoned |
|
| 135447471 | Salut,
|