Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of Ticket #17504, comment 10


Ignore:
Timestamp:
2019-03-23T18:38:30+01:00 (7 years ago)
Author:
mkoniecz

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • Ticket #17504, comment 10

    v1 v2  
    1818I do not consider any of above (except last one) as valid reason for keeping `in_in*` tags, and last one is as far as I know no longer applying anywhere.
    1919
    20 Still, for example in Poland my automated `is_in` removal edit received support to remove `is_in:country` and equivalents, without unanimous support for removal `is_in:province` and just today I was discussing in one of my changesets who was convinced that using OSM database as cache for their data processing is valid use for tags.
     20Still, for example in Poland my automated `is_in` removal edit received support to remove `is_in:country` and equivalents, without unanimous support for removal `is_in:province` and just today I was discussing in one of my changesets with someone who was convinced that using OSM database as cache for their data processing is valid use for tags.
    2121
    2222`is_in:continent` removal requested in this ticket was intended as fir step toward `is_in*` removal so I am not going to protest, but I am not sure is there consensus for `is_in` full scale elimination (that is why I proposed removal of just `is_in`).