This mailing list has been migrated to Mailman 3. This archive will no longer be updated. Messages after 1 February 2020 are missing. Please use the new archive instead.
Diese Mailingliste wurde auf Mailman 3 umgestellt. Dieses Archiv wird nicht mehr länger aktualisiert. Nachrichten nach dem 1. Februar 2020 fehlen. Bitte benutze das neue Archiv.
Am Freitag, den 07.10.2016, 13:07 +0200 schrieb Denis Stein: > Similar topic, same issue: Can/Shall the lifecycle tagging scheme > also > be used for nodes? > > E.g., near Hamburg Hbf. a node [1] is currently tagged as follows: > > > > > railway:disused=switch > > railway:local_operated=no > > railway:switch=default > I would prefer two additional tags: > > > > > disused:railway=switch > > railway:disused=switch > > railway:local_operated=no > > railway:switch=default > > railway=disused > However, JOSM complains on the usage of "railway=disused" on nodes. If you want to use lifecycle tagging, then the disused has to be before the key itself, e.g. disused:railway=switch, not railway:disused=switch. So your example should be: * disused:railway=switch * disused:railway:local_operated=no * disused:railway:switch=default railway=disused for nodes is just wrong because the meaning of railway=disused is "a disused railway track", not "any type of disused railway feature". Regards Alex -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 473 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.openrailwaymap.org/archives/openrailwaymap/attachments/20161008/2142c0bd/attachment.sig>